60th  Congress,  ) 
2d  Session.  § 


SENATE. 


(  Eepoet 
\  No.  2543. 


IN  THE  SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


February  7,  1889.— Ordered  to  be  printed. 

Mr.  Blair,  from  the  Committee  on  Woman  Suffrage,  submitted  the 

following 

REPORT: 

[To  accompany  S.  Res.  11.] 

The  Committee  on  Woman  Suffrage,  to  whom  was  referred  the  joint  res- 
olution (S.  R.  11)  proposing  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  prohibit- 
ing the  denial  or  abridgment  of  the  right  to  vote  by  the  United  States 
or  by  any  State  on  account  of  sex,  having  considered  the  same,  ask 
leave  to  submit  the  following  report : 

The  joint  resolution  is  in  these  words : 

JOINT  EESOLUTION  proposing  an  amendment  to  the  Constitntion  of  the  United  States  extending 

the  right  of  suffrage  to  women. 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Eepresentatives  of  the  United  States  of  America  in 
Congress  assembled  {two-thirds  of  each  House  concurring  therein,)  That  the  following  ar- 
ticle be  proposed  to  the  legislatures  of  the  several  States  as  an  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  ;  which,  when  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  said 
legislatures,  shall  be  valid  as  part  of  said  Constitution,  namely : 

Article  — . 

Section  1.  The  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied 
or  abridged  by  the  United  States  or  by  any  State  on  account  of  sex. 

Sec.  2.  The  Congress  shall  have  power,  by  appropriate  legislation,  to  enforce  the 
provisions  of  this  article. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  proposed  amendment  is  in  the  form  of 
a  prohibition  of  the  denial  or  abridgment  of  the  exercise  of  a  right  the 
existence  of  which  is  presupposed  by  the  very  fact  of  the  prohibition  of 
its  denial  or  abridgment. 

There  are  two  sources  from  which  those  who  believe  in  woman  suf- 
frage as  an  existing  right  derive  its  origin. 

L 

It  is  held  by  one  class  that  the  suffrage  is  a  natural  right  inherent 
in  all  who  are  capable  of  exercising  the  political  functions  of  citizen- 
ship, that  is  to  say,  who  are  capable  of  becoming  component  parts  of 
the  aggregate  body  of  sovereigns  in  all  governments  which  are  repub- 
lican in  form. 

These  say  that  whatever  restrictions  and  conditions  it  is  necessary 
to  impose  upon,  and  whatever  qualifications  may  justly  be  required  of, 
the  voter  in  order  to  secure  the  efficient  exercise  of  the  right  and  to 
prevent  the  impairment  of  the  efficiency  of  government  of  the  people 
by  the  people,  that  sex  as  such  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  them ; 


2 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


that  self-government,  which  in  theory  is  government  of  the  whole  by 
the  entire  body  of  those  capable  of  particii)ation  in  the  sovereignty,  is 
an  act  of  intelligent  decision  guided  by  conscience  upon  issues  presented 
to  the  mind  and  not  to  the  body  5  still  less  is  the  act  of  voting  one  which 
can  be  performed  only  by  the  body,  or  even  by  the  body  and  mind  of  a 
male. 

Those  who  hold  to  this  broad  foundation  of  the  right  of  suffrage  deny 
that  voting  is  simply  an  affirmative  animal  instinct  asserting  itself  in 
the  government  of  the  human  race.  They  claim  that  the  soul  is  supe- 
rior to  the  body  and  that  the  attributes  of  the  soul  and  not  the  members 
of  the  body  are  the  true  tests  of  qualification  and  the  proper  agents 
with  which  the  right  of  suffrage  should  be  exercised.  They  admit  that 
as  a  class  males  have  more  muscle  than  women,  but  they  deny,  and 
prove  by  the  facts,  that  women  have  as  much  of  mental  power,  and  as- 
sert that  the  moral  superiority  of  woman  more  than  compensates  for 
her  average  inferiority  in  vigor  as  an  animal.  They  insist  that  a  politi- 
cal question  can  not  be  safely  submitted  exclusively  to  a  body  of  men, 
simply  because  of  capacity  to  kill  each  other  or  of  disposition  to  do  it, 
but  rather  should  be  submitted  to  decision  in  accordance  with  the  dic- 
tates of  conscience,  after  the  investigation  of  facts  in  the  light  of  reason. 
They  claim  that  woman  has  the  greater  need  of  the  ballot  for  the  pro- 
tection of  her  person  and  property,  especially  of  the  former,  which  is  far 
more  important  than  the  protection  of  her  property,  for  the  reason  that 
she  has  less  of  brute  strength  than  is  possessed  by  man ;  and  in  accord- 
ance with  that  greater  necessity  on  her  part  that  God  has  given  to  her 
a  capacity  for  the  wise  and  equitable  exercise  of  her  equal  right  in  a 
republican  form  of  government,  certainly  not  inferior  to  that  of  the  sex 
which  has,  as  a  rule,  the  more  occasion  to  be  restrained  and  governed 
by  some  power  external  to  themselves  for  their  own  and  the  general 
good. 

But  your  committee  do  not  intend  in  this  report  to  restate  the  argu- 
ments which  guaranty  to  women  the  exercise  of  this  inalienable  natural 
right,  without  which  neither  life,  liberty,  nor  property  can  be  secure. 
These  can  be  found  in  the  several  reports  of  your  committee  made  upon 
this  resolution  when  the  same  has  been  i)ending  in  former  Congresses. 
Nor  shall  we  pause  to  confute  the  sophism  that  woman  is  protected  as 
well  as  man  in  governments  wholly  conducted  by  males.  The  assertion 
is  not  true  in  fact,  and  even  if  women  were  as  well  protected  as  men 
under  the  existing  system  of  sex  domination,  it  is  no  reply  to  the  claim 
that  the  participation  of  women  in  the  government  would  greatly  im- 
prove the  condition  of  all.  The  extension  of  the  power  of  government 
from  the  despot  and  the  monarch  to  the  many,  even  though  they  be 
only  men,  has  resulted  in  untold  good  to  the  whole  race. 

What,  then,  will  be  the  hapijier  condition  of  human  society  when  the 
other  half  of  it,  and  that  by  the  admission  of  man  the  superior,  the  an- 
gelic portion,  shall  be  admitted  to  the  full  enjoyment  of  the  greatest  of 
rights — the  right  preservative  of  all  rights — the  suffrage  or  sover- 
eignty. 

n. 

We  dismiss  this  brief  general  discussion  to  menton  the  second  ground 
upon  which  it  is  claimed  that  woman  now  has  the  right  of  suffrage  in 
this  country,  and  that  is  by  virtue  of  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution 
as  it  now  stands. 

This  claim  is  consistent  with  that  which  finds  the  suffrage  within  the 
domain  of  natural  law.    It  is  believed  by  many,  who  hold  the  suffrage 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


3 


to  be  merely  a  privilege  conferred  or  extended  by  the  governing  power 
and  not  an  inherent  right,  that  the  right  has  been  extended  to  women  by 
the  fourteenth  amendment  of  the  Constitution.  The  great  misfortune 
of  those  who  thus  believe  is  that  the  Supreme  Court  holds  just  the  con- 
trary opinion,  and  so  it  becomes  necessary  either  to  secure  the  reversal 
of  a  solemn  decision  of  that  great  tribunal  or  an  amendment  of  the  Con- 
stitution expressly  recognizing  the  right  itself,  as  is  proposed  to  be  done 
in  the  pending  joint  resolution. 

But  it  may  be  well  briefly  to  examine  the  grounds  upon  which  the 
right  to  the  suffrage  without  distinction  of  sex  is  based  by  those  who 
believe  it  is  already  recognized  and  conferred  in  the  Constitution  as  it 
is.  If  there  be  strong  ground  for  this  belief  it  is  a  reason  why  further 
legislation  should  settle  the  doubt  in  favor  of  the  right.  By  the  terms 
of  the  fourteenth  amendment — 

All  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction 
thereof  are  citizens  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  wherein  they  reside.  No 
State  shall  make  or  enforce  any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  and  immuni- 
ties of  citizens  of  the  United  States;  nor  shall  any  State  deprive  any  person  of  life, 
liberty,  or  property  without  due  process  of  law;  nor  deny  to  any  person  within  its 
jurisdiction  the  equal  protection  of  the  law. 

Under  the  provisions  of  this  amendment  it  is  conceded  that  women 
born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States  are  citizens  ;  that  they  have 
civil  rights,  the  right  to  life,  liberty,  and  property;  also,  it  is  conceded 
of  necessity  that,  as  citizens,  they  have  "  privileges  and  immunities," 
because  their  denial  or  abridgment  by  the  States  is  prohibited.  It 
would  be  a  subject  of  ridicule  if  the  Constitution  were  to  prohibit  the 
denial  or  abridgment  of  that  which  does  not  exist.  Further,  the  four- 
teenth amendment  forbids  a  State  to  deprive  any  person  of  life,  liberty, 
or  property,  etc. 

Now,  when  a  right  or  power  is  granted  or  recognized  as  already  ex- 
isting, there  is  of  necessity  a  grant  or  recognition  of  a  right  to  all 
the  means  necessary  to  its  protection  and  enjoyment.  Without  this 
the  grant  or  the  recognition  of  the  right  would  be  nullitied  by  with- 
holding the  means  indisijensable  to  its  realization.  There  is  an  implied 
grant  of  the  necessary  means  of  enjoyment,  although  there  may  be  none 
expressed.  This  is  conceded  by  the  most  strict  constructionists  of  con- 
stitutional law,  since  to  hold  the  contrary  would  be  a  denial  or  contra- 
diction of  the  terms  of  the  grant  itself — or,  in  other  words,  an  absurdity. 

Can  life,  liberty,  or  property,  or  the  privileges  and  immunities  of 
citizenship  be  realized,  defended,  and  protected  without  political  power! 
Do  not  women  possess,  or  are  they  not  recognized  as  possessed  of,  life, 
liberty,  and  property,  and  of  the  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens 
of  the  United  States  by  virtue  of  the  fourteenth  amendment? 

How  are  these  righ  ts,  privileges,  and  immunities  to  be  secured,  except 
by  political  power,  in  the  case  of  women  any  more  than  to  men  ?  Now, 
if  the  rights,  privileges,  and  immunities  belong  to  women — notas  women 
by  reason  of  their  sex  any  more  than  to  men  for  a  like  reason — how  can 
it  be  that  women  do  not  from  some  source,  either  the  Constitution  or  from 
anterior,  natural,  inalienable  right,  possSss  the  means — that  is  to  say, 
the  political  power — to  protect  and  defend  their  rights,  privileges,  and 
immunities  as  citizens  of  the  United  States  as  well  as  men?  Espe- 
cially how  can  it  be  denied  to  them,  as  a  matter  of  law,  when  their 
necessity  for  the  possession  of  political  power  to  be  used  in  self-defense 
is  greater  than  that  of  men  by  reason  of  physical  inferiority? 

Is  there  anything  in  the  Constitution  which,  in  terms  or  by  implica- 
tion, restricts  political  power  to  men?   By  what  a4ithority  is  it  to  be 


4 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


claimed  that  the  fourteenth  amendment  carries  more  to  men  than  to 
women— giving  to  one  political  power  and  withholding  it  from  the 
other  !  It  must  be  conceded  that  there  is  no  distinction  of  sex  in  the 
Constitution,  and  that  women  take  by  the  fourteenth  amendment  all 
that  is  given  or  guarantied  to  men. 

Kow,  by  numerous  definitions  of  dictionaries  and  decisions  of  judges, 
and  by  the  maxims  of  the  great  writers  upon  the  law,  "privileges  and 
immunities"  of  citizens  under  free  government  are  held  to  include  the 
elective  franchise.  Citizenship  conferred  without  restriction  includes 
sovereignty,  political  as  well  as  civil  rights.  By  the  fifteenth  amendment 
»nhe  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States"  (not  of  the  States)  *'to 
vote"  is  expressly  mentioned.  It  therefore  must  exist.  What  is  the 
object  for  which  this  solemn  fifteenth  amendment  was  enacted  into  the 
fundamental  law  ?   To  protect  something  which  had  no  being  ? 

The  citizen  of  the  United  States  then  was  a  voter,  and  this  amend- 
ment provides  that  "  the  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote 
shall  not  be  denied  or  abridged  by  the  United  States  or  by  any  State  on 
account  of  race,  color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude,  and  Congress 
shall  have  power  to  enforce  this  act  by  appropriate  legislation." 

This  amendment  was  enacted  not  to  limit  or  qualify,  "deny  or 
abridge,"  any  existing  right.  By  no  means.  It  was  a  great  punitive  or 
protective  measure,  aimed  at  a  gross  and  general  deprivation  of  the  right 
to  the  elective  franchise  possessed  by  the  colored  people,  who  had  been 
wronged  out  of  the  exercise  of  their  right  by  reason  of  race,  color,  or 
previous  condition  Of  servitude. 

How  can  this  take  away  the  rights  of  white  citizens,  whether  women 
or  men,  and  if  of  either,  why  of  women  and  not  also  the  suffrage  of  men  ? 
So  the  penalty  inflicted  upon  a  State  by  partial  deprivation  of  repre- 
entation  in  the  House  of  Kepresentatives  and  in  the  electoral  college 
whenever  certain  citizens  are  deprived  of  sufl'rage  has  and  can  have  no 
effect  to  deny  or  abridge  rights  belonging  to  any  one.  These  provisions 
are  aimed  at  abuses  and  violations  of  rights  of  a  certain  class  of  citizens 
of  the  United  States  which  were  being  assailed,  and  not  at  the  extinc- 
tion of  the  rights  themselves  as  possessed  by  the  great  mass  of  citizens 
of  all  races  and  colors  and  of  both  sexes. 

There  would  seem  to  be  no  doubt  that  the  Constitution,  in  the  four- 
teenth and  fifteenth  amendments,  creates  or  recognizes  the  right  of  suf- 
frage as  among  the  rights,  privileges,  and  immunities  of  all  citizens 
alike,  irrespective  of  sex,  subject  only  to  such  implied  qualifications  of 
age,  capacity,  etc.  (but  not  of  sex),  as  are  necessary  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  great  end  for  which  the  right  itself  exists.  So  thought  the 
women  of  this  country  when  the  fourteenth  amendment  was  enacted. 
Test  cases  were  made  by  Miss  Anthony  and  Mrs.  Minor,  who  endeavored 
to  assert  the  right  at  the  polls  and  in  the  courts.  But  in  the  great  case 
of  Minor  vs,  Hoppersett  (21  Wallace,  p.  1G2)  the  Supreme  Court  decided 
in  effect  that  there  is  no  political  power,  no  sovereignty  in  any  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  as  such.  In  other  words  that  the  United  States 
has  no  voter  of  its  own  creation.  There  was  and  there  is  no  other 
ground  upon  which  suffrage  in  United  States  elections  at  least  can  be 
denied  to  women  any  more  than  to  men  under  the  existing  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States. 

It  is  not  the  purpose  of  your  committee  to  comment  upon  this  de- 
cision, which  seems  to  concede  that  the  United  States  is  not  a  sover- 
eignty;  that  the  State  is  supreme  and  the  nation  a  m>  th.  Many  be- 
lieve that  if  the  question  were  again  raised  and  brought  before  that 
august  and  co-ordinate  power  in  the  Government  that  this  decision 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


5 


would  be  reversed,  or  at  least  placed  upon  grounds  which  would  relieve 
our  existence  as  a  political  entity  of  all  question,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped 
that  the  existence  of  the  political  equality  of  woman  with  man  would 
be  vindicated  by  the  court  itself. 

But  although  there  are  strong  reasons  for  believing  that  the  Con- 
stitution now  guaranties  the  suflrage  to  both  men  and  women,  the  decis- 
ion in  Minor  vs.  Hoppersett  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  a  belief 
which  seems  to  be  necessary  in  order  to  avoid  extinction  as  a  nation, 
and  for  the  hope  that  the  decision  might  be  reversed  upon  further  hear- 
ing, the  policy  has  been  adopted  by  the  women  of  the  country  of  press- « 
ing  at  once  for  this  constitutional  amendment,  the  adoption  of  which 
will  settle  the  question  at  once  and  forever.  In  this  connection  it  is 
proper  to  call  attention  to  the  exhaustive  arguments  of  Mrs.  Hooker  and 
of  others  in  the  appendix. 

It  is  perhaps  necessary  to  suggest  that  the  provisions  of  section  2  of 
the  first  article  of  the  Constitution  expressly  create  an  elector ;  that  is 
to  say,  a  voter  of  the  United  States.  The  fact  tbat  his  qualifications 
are  to  be  the  same  as  those  of  electors  or  voters  in  the  State  wherein  he 
resides  does  not  deprive  him  of  the  sovereign  capacity  of  a  voter  of  the 
United  States.  His  personal  identity  exists  in  two  sovereign  capaci- 
ties of  citizen  and  voter  of  both  the  State  and  of  the  nation.  This  dis- 
tinction seems  to  have  wholly  escaped  the  attention  of  the  Supreme 
Court. 

m. 

The  movement  in  this  country  for  the  exercise  of  the  suffrage  by 
women  assumed  the  form  of  a  popular  political  agitation  in  the  year 
1848,  when  the  first  convention  was  held  at  Seneca  Falls,  in  the  State 
of  New  York.  Singularly  enough  its  immediate  cause  was  the  exclusion 
of  women  delegates  from  a  world's  convention  held  in  London  to  pro- 
mote the  abolition  of  slavery.  What  a  comment  upon  the  inconsisten- 
cies of  human  nature  and  the  blinding  effect  of  habit  and  prejudice  it  is 
that  an  act  of  tyranny  on  the  part  of  these  emancipators,  exercised  in 
the  very  act  of  demanding  freedom  for  the  enslaved  African  toward 
their  fellow-agitators,  should  have  constituted  the  startling  revelation 
of  a  real  subjection  of  woman  to  man,  world-wide,  and,  in  many  respects, 
as  complete  and  galling  when  analyzed  and  duly  considered  by  its  vic- 
tims as  that  of  the  negro  to  his  master.  For  it  must  be  remembered  that 
everywhere  in  civilized  countries  the  female  sex  is  quite  the  equal  of 
the  male  in  capacity  and  high  devotion  to  the  performance  of  duty, 
and  that  there  is  no  service  so  obnoxious  as  that  which  we  are  forced 
to  render  to  our  equals  or  inferiors. 

Since  that  event  the  contest  has  been  waged  with  great  pertinacity 
and  zeal,  and  the  manifest  justice  of  the  demands  of  women  for  political 
equality  with  men,  when  living  in  the  same  community,  has  steadily 
forced  the  citadels  of  prejudice  and  usurpation,  until  now  it  is  apparent 
that  within  a  few  years,  at  furthest,  all  citizens  will  vote  and  hold  office 
regardless  of  the  irrelevant  distinction  of  sex. 

A  short  review  of  the  present  condition  and  extent  of  the  movement 
will  furnish  an  impressive  demonstration  of  the  great  i)rogress  which 
has  taken  place  in  the  last  half  century,  and  will  convince  any  one  who 
concedes  that  revolutions  do  not  go  backward,  that  in  all  human  prob- 
ability women  will  be  free  in  this  country  within  the  next  twenty-five 
years ;  while  in  some  portions  of  the  world  at  large  her  condition  is 
even  more  hopeful  than  in  the  United  States. 


6 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


There  seems  to  be  room  for  the  belief  that  we,  as  Americans,  the 
descendauts  of  tbe  *'lirst-borii  of  liberty  divine/^  have  been  resting 
too  imicli  upon  the  iTiurels  and  memories  of  the  fathers,  and  that  while 
we  have  been  celebrating  the  Fourth  of  July  other  i:>eoples  have  been 
steadily  advancing,  until  they  have  passed  us  in  the  march  toward 
freedom  and  equality. 

The  Tory  premier  of  England,  Lord  Salisbury,  in  an  address  to  the 
"  Primrose  League,"  delivered  on  the  30th  of  November  last  at  the 
Lyceum  Theater,  in  Edinburgh,  referring  to  the  gradual  extension  of 
the  suffrage  to  women,  said : 

Now,  the  Primrose  League  in  that  respect  represents  to  my  mind  modifications  of 
our  constitution  that  have  taken  place  in  the  past  and  modifications  which  will 
probably  take  place  in  the  future.  In  the  past,  as  we  know,  there  has  been  a  large 
extension  of  the  suffrage,  and  a  very  much  larger  proportion  of  the  inhabitants  of  this 
country  take  their  share  in  the  election  of  members  and  in  the  framing  of  the  policy 
by  which  the  country  is  guided.  *  *  *  i  am  now  speaking  for  myself  only — do  not 
imagine  that  I  am  speaking  for  anybody  else — but  speaking  for  myself  only.  I  ear- 
nestly hope  that  the  day  is  not  very  far  distant  when  women  shall  bear  their  fair 
share  in  voting  for  members  of  Parliament  and  in  determining  the  policy  of  the  coun- 
try. /  can  conceive  of  no  argument  hy  which  they  are  excluded.  It  is  obvious  that  they 
are  as  abundantly  fit  as  many  who  now  possess  the  suffrage  by  knowledge,  by  train- 
ing, and  by  character,  and  their  influence  is  likely  to  weigh  in  the  direction  in  which 
in  an  age  so  material  as  ours  is,  so  exceedingly  valuable — namely,  in  the  direction  of 
morality  and  religion. 

And  he  continues  thus,  speaking  to  this  political  society  of  women : 

I  look  upon  the  Primrose  League,  therefore,  as  not  only  representing  a  fact  in  the 
past,  but  enshrining  a  policy  for  which  we  may  hope  in  the  future,  and  I  gladly  see 
how  readily  it  has  achieved  its  conquests  over  populations  in  various  parts  of  this 
island,  differing  so  largely  in  temperament  aad  character,  and  thereby  proving  that 
it  has  that  universal  adaptability  which  belongs  to  every  effective  political  instru- 
ment. 

Such  words,  coming  from  the  Tory  Premier  of  England,  who  repre- 
sents a  sentiment  upon  the  subject  far  behind  that  prevailing  in  the 
great  Liberal  party,  should  engage  the  candid  attention  of  the  Ameri- 
can people  upon  the  condition  of  women  and  the  deprivation  of  rights 
to  which  she  is  subjected  in  this  boasted  ^'land  of  the  free.'' 

Mr.  Hamilton  Wilcox,  long  a  distinguished  advocate  of  suffrage  to 
women,  has  lately  published  a  pamphlet  filled  with  statistics  of  the 
present  condition  of  the  movement  which  are  of  great  value.  Wher- 
ever there  is  in  any  form  of  practical  action  a  participation  by  woman 
in  the  voting  power,  any  enfranchisement  of  woman  by  permission  to 
exercise  political  i^ower,  whether  in  the  recognition  of  the  right  to  des- 
ignate officers  who  by  law  are  to  be  appointed  upon  petitions — as  in 
case  of  the  appointment  of  school  officers  in  Texas  by  the  county  judge 
who  is  supposed  to  act  upon  the  petitions  of  both  women  and  men  j 
municipal  suffrage,  as  in  the  State  of  Kansas;  or  the  full  suffrage,  as  in 
Wyoming;  and,  until  the  late  adverse  decision  of  an  inferior  court,  in 
Washington ;  and  the  equal  municipal  and  county  suffrage  of  unmarried 
women  and  property-holders  with  men  in  England — the  concession  is 
treated  as  an  abandonment  of  the  doctrine  that  woman  is  not  entitled 
to  the  possession  of  political  power.  Upon  this  basis  Mr.  Wilcox  shows 
that  there  are  over  14,000,000  square  miles  in  the  world,  with  a  popu- 
lation of  nearly  three  hundred  millions  of  people,  where  woman  suffrage 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree  already  prevails,  and  in  all  this  region  the 
agitation  is  for  complete  enfranchisement  or  equality  with  man  in  politi- 
cal power.  Here,  then,  is  the  great  governing  force  of  the  world  al- 
ready committed  to  the  principle  of  woman  suffrage. 

In  the  province  of  Ontario,  Canada,  with  18i,000  square  miles, 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


7 


unmarried  women  vote  for  all  elective  officers  but  two  on  like  terms 
with  men.  lu  the  province  of  Quebec  women  vote  in  the  various  pro- 
vincial cities  and  in  Montreal  and  Quebec.  In  Wyoming  Territory,  of 
98,000  square  miles,  women  have  complete  suffrage,  and  they  use  it, 
too.  In  British  Columbia,  with  341,000  square  miles,  women  vote  for 
all  elective  officers  but  members  of  parliament.  Kansas  has  82,000 
square  miles  and  municipal  suffrage  for  women,  which  is  close  upon  the 
full  suffrage,  and  its  success  in  that  State,  many  libellous  falsehoods  to 
the  contrary  notwithstanding,  will  speedily  secure  full  suffrage  in 
this  great  central  star  in  the  zenith  of  freedom.  Texas  has  274,000 
square  miles,  and  is  making  sure  progress  in  this  reform.  When  the 
petitions  of  women  couut  in  the  appointment  of  school  officers,  addi- 
tional concessions  are  sure  and  full  fruition  is  inevitable. 

Woman  suffrage  in  some  of  its  various  forms  exists  in  Arizona, 
113,000  square  miles;  Arkansas,  54,000;  Colorado,  104,000;  Dakota, 
149,000;  Idaho,  64,000;  Indiana,  36,000;  Kentucky, 40,000;  Massachu- 
setts, 8,000;  Michigan,  59,000 ;  Minnesota,  83,000;  Mississippi,  49,000; 
Montana,  146,000;  Nebraska,  77,000;  New  Brunswick,  27,000;  New 
Hampshire,  9,000  ;  New  Jersey,  8,000 ;  New  York,  49,000 ;  Nova  Scotia, 
21,000;  Ontario,  102,111;  Oregou,  96,000;  Quebec,  188,000;  Texas, 
265,000;  Utah,  85,000;  Vermont,  9,000;  Washington,  90,000 ;  Wiscon- 
sin, 56,000;  Wyomiog,  98,000.  In  Idaho,  Utah,  and  Washington  the 
right  hitherto  exercised  is  temporarily  suspended,  owing  to  outside 
causes,  and  not  to  any  change  in  the  sentiments  of  the  peoi)le  them- 
selves. The  above  gives  a  total  area  of  2,630,000  square  miles  on  the 
North  American  continent  wherein  the  suffrage  is  now  to  some  extent 
in  the  hands  of  women.  Of  this  territory  810,000  square  miles  are  in 
Canada  and  1,820,000  in  the  United  States. 

In  England,  Scotland,  and  Wales,  women,  unless  married,  vote  for 
all  elective  officers  except  members  of  Parliament,  and  are  very  near 
the  full  realization  of  equal  rights  with  men.  In  Ireland  women  vote 
everywhere  for  poor-law  guardians ;  in  sea-ports  for  harbor  boards,  and 
in  Belfast  for  municipal  officers.  In  Sweden  their  suffrage  is  about 
the  same  as  in  Britain,  and  indirectly  they  vote  for  members  of  the 
House  of  Lords.  In  Eussia,  women,  heads  of  households,  vote  for  all 
elective  officers  and  on  all  local  questions.  In  Austria-Hungary  they 
vote  (by  proxy)  at  all  elections,  including  members  of  provincial  and 
imperial  Parliaments.  In  Croatia  and  Dalmatia  they  vote  at  local  elec- 
tions in  person.  In  Italy  widows  vote  for  members  of  Parliament.  In 
Finland  women  vote  for  all  elective  officers. 

In  Asia  even  progress  is  being  made.  In  British  Burmah  women 
tax-payers  vote  in  the  rural  districts.  In  the  Madras  presidency  they 
can  do  so  in  all  municipalities,  and  so  in  the  Bombay  presidency.  In 
all  the  countries  of  Eussian  Asia  they  can  do  so  wherever  a  Eussian 
colony  settles. 

Municipal  suffrage,  which  is  the  morning  star  of  the  full-orbed  sun, 
exists  in  New  Zealand,  Victoria,  New  South  Wales,  Queensland,  and 
South  Australia ;  and  in  New  Zealand  the  legislature  has  resolved  that 
women  shall  vote  for  members  of  parliament. 

So  suffrage  is  existing  in  some  form  upon  the  Isle  of  Man,  Pitcairn 
Island,  Tasmania,  Iceland,  Sardinia,  Sicily;  and,  in  all,  woman  suffrage, 
complete  or  partial,  exists  in  over  two  thousand  of  the  islands  of  the 
world. 

Mr.  Wilcox  sums  up  his  valuable  compilation  thus  : 

The  area  Freedom  lias  already  in  some  degree  conquered  is  half  as  large  again  as 
the  enormous  British  Empire ;  seventy- five  per  cent,  greater  than  the  vast  dominions 


8 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


of  the  Tsar;  four  times  the  size  of  all  Europe  or  Australia;  double  that  of  both  com- 
biucd  ;  almost  equal  to  the  North  aud  South  American  continents  together.  Its  pop- 
ulation equals  that  of  all  North  America,  South  America,  aud  Africa,  and  almost 
equals  the  population  of  all  Europe. 

To  this  it  should  be  adtled  that  we  have  here  indicated  the  tendeucy 
of  public  opinion  among  intelligent  men,  for  there  is  nowhere  conces- 
sion of  right  or  extension  of  privilege  to  women  but  by  the  free  consent 
of  men.  Woman  has  never  caused  an  insurrection  or  even  the  sb'ghtest 
popular  disturbance,  far  less  wars  and  revolutions,  to  obtain  a  single 
boon  from  mankind.  Her  pathetic  but  mighty  warfare  for  a  "fair 
chance  in  the  race  of  life  "  is  the  most  remarkable  fact  in  the  history 
of  the  human  race.  The  sublime  movement  seems  to  conquer  like  the 
sun  in  his  beneficent  course,  and  to  demonstrate  the  almighty  power  of 
a  patient,  peaceful,  but  everlasting  appealto  the  innate  sense  of  justice, 
which  ultimately  must  control  the  actions  of  men,  even  when  they  are 
called  upon  to  surrender  one-half  of  their  own  apparent  consequence 
and  power.  But  who  can  fail  to  see  that  nothing  but  a  curse  to  man 
can  follow  the  withholding  of  her  right  from  woman  ? 

When  was  slavery,  in  any  form,  as  harmful  to  the  slave  as  to  the 
master?   In  this  case  the  giver  would  be  thrice  blessed,  indeed. 

Jefferson  trembled  when  he  remembered  that  God  is  just.  Now, 
woman,  our  equal,  asks  relief  from  her  greater  wrongs.  We  shall  re- 
fuse them  at  our  peril.  God  is  still  just.  Jefl'erson's  forebodings  were 
but  a  faint  glimpse  of  the  terrible  retribution  which  descended  upon 
the  people.  We  of  this  generation  do  know  that  His  justice  will  not 
sleep  forever,  for  we  have  felt  its  terrible  i)ower.  Injustice  to  woman, 
by  withholding  her  equal  political  rights,  will  surely  be  followed  by 
penalties  and  calamities  not  hitherto  surpassed,  for  in  all  history  there 
has  been  no  greater  wrong. 

Unless  this  Government  shall  be  made  and  preserved  truly  republi- 
can in  form  by  the  enfranchisement  of  woman,  the  great  reforms  which 
her  ballot  would  accomplish  may  never  be ;  the  demoralization  and 
disintegration  now  proceeding  in  the  body-politic  are  not  likely  soon  to 
be  arrested.  Corruption  of  the  male  sufirage  is  already  a  well-nigh 
fatal  disease;  intemi)erance  has  no  sufficient  foe  in  the* law-making 
power ;  a  republican  form  of  Government  can  not  survive  half  slave 
and  half  free. 

The  ballot  is  withheld  from  women  because  men  are  not  willing  to 
part  with  one  half  the  sovereign  power.  There  is  no  other  real  cause 
for  the  continued  perpetration  of  this  unnatural  tyranny. 

Enfranchise  woman  or  this  Eepublic  will  steadily  advance  to  the 
same  destruction,  the  same  ignoble  and  tragic  catastrophe,  which  has 
ingulfed  the  male  republics  of  history.  Let  us  establish  a  republic  in 
which  both  men  and  women  shall  be  free  indeed.  Then  shall  the  Re- 
public be  perpetual. 

Note. — In  the  mouth  of  April  last  delegates  in  behalf  of  the  First  International 
Woman's  Council,  then  in  session  in  this  city,  appeared  before  your  committee  and 
were  fully  heard;  and  during  the  present  session  delegates  of  the  National  Woman 
Suffrage  Association,  which  lately  held  its  twenty-first  anniversary  here,  addressed 
the  committee.  Both  of  these  historic  bodies  of  women  were  represented  by  dele- 
gates of  great  ability,  who  discussed  this  most  important  question  with  a  fullness  of 
detail  not  possible  to  be  entered  upon  in  this  report.  But  the  matter  should  be  given 
wide  circulation  and  be  permanently  preserved.  We  therefore  call  special  attention 
to  the  appendix  to  our  report. 


Appendix  I. 


Bearing  before  the  Committee  on  Woman  Suffrage^  United  States  Senate^ 

April  2,  1888.  * 

Monday,  Aj^ril  2,  1888 — 10  o'clock  a.  m. 

The  committee  met  to  hear  arguments  in  behalf  of  woman  suffrage 
from  the  delegates  to  the  International  Woman's  Council. 

Present,  Senators  Cockrell  (chairman),  Brown,  Blair,  Palmer,  Chase, 
and  Bowen. 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  ELIZABETH  CADY  STANTON. 

Mrs.  Stanton.  Honorable  gentlemen,  for  many  successive  years  a 
class  of  women,  fully  comprehending  the  dignity  of  citizenship  in  a  Ee- 
public,  have  appeared  before  committees  of  the  House  and  the  Senate, 
praying  that  the  national  Constitution  should  be  so  interpreted  or 
amended  as  to  secure  to  the  women  of  the  nation  all  the  rights,  privi- 
leges, and  immunities  of  citizens. 

During  this  discussion  the  basic  principles  of  reimblican  government, 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  the  national  Constitution,  have  been 
thoroughly  studied  by  us,  until  it  may  be  truly  said  that  the  leaders  in 
the  suffrage  movement  fully  understand  the  Constitutioii,  and  that  to 
them  its  provisions  for  the  largest  liberty  are  as  familiar  as  the  spelling 
book.  Their  arguments  already  gild  the  page  of  history  and  are  highly 
creditable,  for  their  research  and  eloquence,  to  the  women  of  this  gen- 
eration. 

Our  champions,  too,  in  the  halls  of  Congress  and  legislative  assem- 
blies in  half  the  States  of  the  Union  have  based  their  arguments  on 
these  immortal  documents,  which  together  form  the  Magna  Charta  of 
human  liberties.  Logical  arguments  against  woman's  enfranchisement 
can  not  be  based  on  the  principles  of  our  Government,  for  they  all  alike 
proclaim  "equal  rights  to  all"  without  regard  to  race,  color,  sex,  or 
previous  conditions  of  servitude.  Individual  sovereignty,  individual 
conscience  and  judgment,  are  the  central  truths  of  a  republic,  from 
which  radiate  the  guiding  principles  that  lighten  our  path  through  all 
the  complications  of  government. 

The  Constitution  as  it  is,  in  spirit  and  letter,  is  broad  enough  to  pro- 
tect the  personal  and  property  rights  of  all  citizens  under  our  Hag.  By 
every  principle  of  fair  interpretation  we  need  no  amendment,  no  new 
definitions  of  the  terms  "people,"  "persons,"  "citizens,"  no  additional 
power  conferred  on  Congress  to  enable  this  body  to  establish  a  republi- 
can form  of  government  in  every  State  of  the  Union ;  and  whenever  our 
rulers  are  ready  to  make  the  experiment  they  will  see  that  they  already 
possess  all  the  constitutional  power  they  need  to  act,  and  that  the  right 
of  suffrage  is,  and  always  was,  the  inalienable  right  of  every  citizen  under 
government. 

9 


10 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


Let  me  rehearse  a  few  of  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  to  show 
your  i^ower  and  our  rights  as  citizens  of  a  republic : 

We,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect  union,  estab- 
lish justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote 
the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity, 
do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America. 

Article  I,  section  2 : 

The  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  composed  of  members  chosen  every  second 
year  by  the  people  of  the  several  States,  and  the  electors  in  each  State  shall  have  the 
qualifications  requisite  for  electors  of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the  State  legis- 
lature. 

Section  4 : 

The  times,  places,  and  manner  of  holding  elections  for  Senators  and  Representatives 
shall  be  prescribed  in  each  State  by  the  legislature  thereof ;  but  the  Congress  may  at 
any  time  by  law  make  or  alter  such  regulations,  except  as  to  the  places  of  choosing 
Senators.  (See  Elliot's  Debates,  vol.  3,  p.  366 — remarks  of  Mr.  Madison — Story's 
Commentaries,  sees.  623,  626,  578.) 

Section  8.  The  Congress  shall  have  power — 

To  establish  a  uniform  mode  of  naturalization,  to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be 
necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the  foregoing  powers,  and  all  other 
powers  vested  by  this  Constitution  in  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  or  in  any 
department  or  oflScer  thereof. 

Section  9.  No  bill  of  attainder  or  ex  post  facto  law  shall  be  passed. 

No  title  of  nobility  shall  be  granted  by  the  United  States. 

No  State  shall  pass  any  bill  of  attainder,  ex  post  facto  law,  or  law 
impairing  the  obligations  of  contracts,  or  grant  any  title  of  nobility. 
(See  Cummings  vs.  The  State  of  Missouri,  Wallace  Eep.,  287,  and  ex 
parte  Garland,  same  volume.) 

Article  lY,  section  2 : 

The  citizens  of  each  State  shall  be  entitled  to  all  privileges  and  immunities  of  citi- 
zens in  the  several  States. 

The  elective  franchise  is  one  of  the  privileg:es  secured  by  this  sec- 
tion. (See  Corfield  vs.  Coryell,  4  Washington  Circuit  Court  Keps.,  380, 
cited  and  approved  in  Durham  vs.  Lamphere,  3  Gray;  Mass.  llep.,  276, 
and  Bennett  vs.  Boggs,  Baldwin  Rep.,  p.  72,  Circuit  Court  U.  S.) 

Section  4 : 

The  United  States  shall  guaranty  to  every  State  in  this  Union  a  republican  form 
of  government. 

How  can  that  form  of  government  be  republican  when  one-half  the 
people  are  forever  deprived  of  all  participation  in  its  affairs  % 
Article  VI : 

This  Constitution,  and  the  laws  of  the  United  "States  which  shall  be  made  in  pur- 
suance thereof,  shall  be  the  supreme  law  o?  the  land;  and  the  judges  in  every  State 
shall  be  bound  thereby,  anything  in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  any  State  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding. 

XIY  amendment : 

All  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States,  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction 
thereof,  are  citizens  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  wherein  they  reside. 

No  State  shall  make  or  enforce  any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  or  immu- 
nities of  the  United  Sfcates. 

Even  the  preamble  of  the  Constitution  is  an  argument  for  self-govern- 
ment— ^'  We,  the  people."  You  recognize  women  as  people,  for  you  count 
us  in  the  basis  of  representation.  Half  our  Congressmen  hold  their  seats 
to-day  as  representatives  of  women.  We  help  to  swell  the  figures  by 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


11 


which  you  are  here,  and  too  many  of  you,  alas!  are  only  figurative  rei)re- 
sentatives,  paying  little  heed  to  our  rights  as  citizens. 

"  No  bill  of  attainder  shall  be  passed."  No  title  of  nobility  granted." 
So  says  the  Constitution;  and  yet  you  have  passed  bills  of  attainder  in 
every  State  of  the  Union  making  sex  a  disqualification  for  citizenship. 
You  have  granted  titles  of  nobility  to  every  male  voter,  making  all  men 
rulers,  governors,  sovereigns,  over  all  women. 

"  The  United  States  shall  guaranty  to  every  State  in  the  Union  a 
republican  form  of  government."  And  yet  we  have  not  a  republican 
form  of  government  in  a  single  State  in  the  Union.  One-half  the  people 
have  never  consented  to  a  single  law  under  which  they  live.  They  have 
had  rulers  placed  over  them  in  whom  they  have  no.  choice.  They  are 
taxed  without  representation,  tried  in  our  courts  by  men,  for  the  viola- 
tion of  laws  made  by  men,  with  no  appeal  except  to  men,  and  for  crimes 
over  which  men  should  have  no  jurisdiction  whatever,  while  honorable 
gentlemen  all — these,  and  many  more  provisions  of  the  Constitution 
are  violated  every  day  that  woman  remains  disfranchised.  You  are 
very  conscientious  in  not  using  the  power  you  already  possess  to  crown 
us  with  all  the  rights  of  citizens. 

There  is  no  significance  in  the  argument  that  the  fathers  did  not  in- 
tend to  include  women  in  these  provisions.  The  contrary  supposition 
is  quite  as  fair  as  in  spirit,  and,  Ijetter,  they  have  done  so.  "  We,  the 
people"  are  three  plain  English  words  that  do  not  admit  of  any  sul)tle, 
symbolical  meaning,  and  when  you  count  us  in  the  basis  of  represen- 
tation, as  I  said,  you  admit  that  we  are  people.  Again,  as  women  voted 
all  along  from  the  earliest  days  in  England,  and  many  voted  and  held 
important  ofi&ces  in  colonial  days  in  our  country,  the  fact  must  have 
been  familiar  to  the  fathers. 

Article  4,  section  2,  says  the  citizens  of  each  State  shall  be  entitled 
to  all  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several  States.  Yet, 
if  citizens  from  Washington  Territory,  Wyoming,  or  Kansas,  where 
women  vote,  pass  into  any  other  State  or  Territory  they  lose  the  right 
to  vote,  the  fundamental  right  of  citizenship. 

We  have  abundant  guaranties  in  the  Constitution  to  secure  to  woman 
all  her  rights.  All  we  need  is  that  some  far-seeing  statesman  or  chief 
justice  may  arise  who  shall  fairly  interpret  the  constitutional  law  we 
already  possess ;  a  man  who,  like  Lord  Mansfield  in  the  Somerset  case, 
shall  declare  that,  according  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions,  no  disfran- 
chised citizen  can  breathe  on  American  soil.  That  simple  declaration 
of  Lord  Mansfield  struck  every  fetter  from  the  slaves  in  every  land 
and  isle  of  the  sea  under  the  shadow  of  the  English  throne. 

The  chief  justice  of  Massachusetts  abolished  slavery  in  that  State  by 
a  similar  declaration.  The  fact  that  the  pronoun  ''he"  is  used  in  various 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  does  not  decide  that  man  alone  is  referred 
to,  for  in  the  whole  criminal  code  the  pronouns  are  "he,"  "his,"  "him." 
Surely  if  women  can  be  made  to  pay  all  the  penalties  of  violated  law  as 
"he,"  she  might  be  permitted  to  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of  a  citizen  as 
"  he."   If  a  woman  can  hang  as  "he,"  she  might  vote  as  "he." 

I  would  quote  a  few  opinions  of  distinguished  statesmen  and  publi- 
cists, to  show  what  our  ablest  men  think  as  to  where?  the  principles  of 
our  Government  legitimately  lead  us  in  deciding  the  inalienable  rights 
of  citizens. 

The  Declaration  of  Independence  asserts  that  to  secure  the  inalien- 
able rights  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  governments 
are  instituted  among  men,  "deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent 
of  the  governed." 

S.  Rep.  1  2S 


12 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


Beujamin  Frauklin  said: 

Liberty  consists  in  having  an  actual  share  in  the  appointment  of  those  who  frame 
the  laws  and  who  are  the  guardians  of  every  man's  life,  property,  and  peace. 

That  they  who  have  no  voice  nor  vote  in  the  electing  of  rei>resentative8  do  not  en- 
joy liberty,  but  are  absolutely  enslaved  to  those  who  have  votes  and  to  their  repre- 
sentatives. 

James  Madison  said : 

Under  every  view  of  the  subject,  it  seems  indispensable  that  the  mass  of  the  citizens 
should  not  be  without  a  voice  in  making  the  laws  which  they  are  to  obey,  and  in 
choosing  the  magistrates  who  are  to  administer  them. 

Samuel  Adams  said : 

Eepresentation  and  legislation,  as  well  as  taxation,  are  inseparable,  according  to 
the  spirit  of  our  Constitution  and  of  all  others  that  are  free. 

Again,  he  said : 

No  man  can  be  justly  taxed  by,  or  bound  in  conscience  to  obey,  any  law  to  which 
he  has  not  given  his  consent  in  person  or  by  his  representative. 

And  again : 

No  man  can  take  another's  property  from  him  without  his  consent.  This  is  the  law 
of  nature,  and  a  violation  of  it  is  the  same  thing  whether  it  is  done  by  one  man,  who 
is  called  a  king,  or  by  five  hundred  of  another  denomination. 

James  Otis,  in  speaking  of  the  rights  of  the  colonists  as  descendants 
of  Englishmen,  said  they  were  not  to  be  cheated  out  of  them  by  any 
phantom  of  virtual  representation,  or  any  other  fiction  of  law  or  politics.'^ 

Again : 

No  such  phrase  as  virtual  representation  is  known  in  law  or  constitution.  It  is 
altogether  a  subtlety  and  illusion,  wholly  unfounded  and  absurd. 

Among  all  the  rights  and  privileges  appertaining  unto  us,  that  of  having  a  share 
in  the  legislation,  and  being  governed  by  such  laws  as  we  ourselves  shall  cause,  is 
the  most  fundamental  and  essential  as  well  as  the  most  advantageous  and  beneficial. 

The  judicious  Hooker  wrote: 

Agreeable  to  the  same  just  privileges  of  natural  equity  is  that  maxim  of  the  En- 
glish constitution,  that  "law,  to  bind  all,  must  be  assented  to  by  all,"  and  there  can 
be  no  legal  appearance  of  assent  without  some  degree  of  representation. 

In  1790,  Condorcet,  in  his  treatise  on  the  admission  of  women  to  the 
rights  of  citizenship  in  France,  says : 

Now,  the  rights  of  men  result  solely  from  the  fact  that  they  are  rational  beings, 
susceptible  of  acquiring  moral  ideas  and  reasoning  on  those  ideas.  Women,  having 
the  same  qualities,  have  the  same  equal  rights.  Either  no  one  individual  of  the  hu- 
man kind  has  true  rights  or  all  have  the  same,  and  one  who  votes  against  the  right' 
of  another,  whatever  be  that  other's  religion,  color,  or  sex,  from  that  moment  for- 
feits his  own. 

Mirabeau  condenses  the  whole  question  in  his  definition  that  "a  rep- 
resentative body  should  be  a  miniature  of  the  whole  community.'^ 

The  right  of  women  to  personal  representation  through  the  ballot 
seems  to  me  unassailable  wherever  the  right  of  man  is  conceded  and 
exercised.  I  can  conceive  of  no  possible  abstract  justification  for  the 
exclusion  of  the  one  and  the  inclusion  of  the  other. 

For  years  we  demanded  our  rights  under  the  Constitution  as  it  is, 
specifically  under  the  fourteenth  amendment.  Some  of  our  coadjutors 
tested  its  legality  by  exercising  the  right  of  sufi'rage  in  their  respective 
States.  Their  cases  were  tried  in  the  Supreme  Court  and  decided 
against  them,  thus  practically  declaring  that  under  neither  State  nor 
national  constitutions  is  there  any  guaranty  for  the  protection  of  the 
political  rights  of  women,  and  their  civil  rights  have  also  been  denied 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


13 


by  both  the  State  and  General  Governments.  A  woman  in  the  State 
of  Illiuois  was  denied  the  right  to  practice  law,  and  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  to  which  she  carried  her  case,  confirmed  the  State's 
decision. 

Since  these  decisions  we  have  asked  for  a  sixteenth  amendment,  de- 
claring that  all  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  shall  apply  equally 
to  men  and  women. 

Although  we  have  had  these  hearings  eighteen  years  in  succession, 
and  all  the  minority  reports  of  our  champions,  from  General  Butler,  of 
Massachusetts,  down  to  Senator  Blair,  of  New  Hampshire,  have  been 
able,  unanswerable  constitutional  arguments,  the  majority  reports  have 
studiousl}^  avoided  logic,  common  sense  and  Constitution,  and  based 
their  objections  upon  the  most  trivial  popular  prejudices.  Lecky,  the 
historian,  has  well  said  the  success  of  a  movemeiit  depends  much  less 
on  the  force  of  its  arguments,  or  upon  the  ability  of  its  advocates,  than 
the  predisposition  of  society  to  receive  it. 

Though  our  arguments  have  never  been  answered,  it  is  fair  to  sup- 
pose that  the  honorable  gentlemen  who  have  written  the  adverse  re- 
ports have  read  the  Constitution  which  they  have  sworn  to  support, 
and  are  fully  g;ware  that  the  weight  of  argument  rests  on  our  side. 
Hence  they  betake  themselves  to  the  world  of  speculation,  where  they 
can  manufacture  statistics  adapted  to  their  prejudices.  As  our  argu- 
ments are  never  answered,  it  is  evident  they  make  no  impression  on  our 
opponents,  as  each  committee  in  turn  rehearses  the  popular  objections, 
though  we  have  pointed  out  their  absurdity  as  often  as  they  are  offered- 

Instead  of  a  constitutional  argument  at  this  time  I  will  review  a  few 
of  the  points  made  by  former  majority  committees,  suggesting  that  the 
gentlemen  to  report  on  this  hearing  will  try  to  strike  out  some  new  and 
more  worthy  trend  of  thought.  It  may  not  be  known  to  you  gentle- 
men that  all  these  reports  are  published  in  the  History  of  Woman  Suf- 
frage and  that  these  volumes  have  been  not  only  extensively  circulated 
in  this  country  and  placed  in  all  our  leading  public  libraries,  but  that 
they  are  also  circulated  in  foreign  lands  and  placed  in  all  the  old  uni- 
versities in  Great  Britain  and  Europe. 

However  indifferent  our  statesmen  may  be  to  their  own  reputation, 
their  wives  and  daughters  do  not  wish  them  to  make  fools  of  them- 
selves on  the  page  of  history.  I  never  glance  over  these  reports  that  1 
do  not  blush  for  my  countrymen.  My  only  consolation  is  that  the  able 
and  eloquent  minority  reports  do  in  a  measure  redeem  the  dignity  of 
these  committees  in  both  the  Senate  and  the  House.  In  view  of  such 
reports  as  the  majority  have  given  us  I  can  not  express  to  you,  gentle- 
men, the  humiliation  I  feel,  as  a  native-born  American  citizen,  much 
older,  probably,  than  any  member  on  the  committee,  that  after  half  a 
century  of  weary  waiting  and  watching,  educated,  refined  women  are 
still  compelled  to  beg  of  their  own  Saxon  fathers,  husbands,  brothers, 
and  sons,  for  those  civil  and  political  rights  so  freely  granted  to  every 
foreigner  who  lands  on  our  shores. 

While  I  possess  every  quabfication  of  a  voter — age,  property,  educa- 
cation ;  while  I  fully  appreciate  the  genius  of  republican  institutions, 
and  glory  in  the  success  of  our  triumphant  democracy;  while  traveling 
in  the  Old  World  my  proudest  boast  has  ever  been  "I  am  an  American 
citizen yet  to  my  pleadings  for  the  political  rights  of  women  you  turn 
a  deaf  ear,  and  hold  the  very  idea  of  woman's  enfranchisement  up  to 
scorn,  while  you  extend  the  right  hand  of  welcome  to  everv  ignorant 
foreigner  who  lands  on  our  shores,  who  has  no  idea  of  what  constitutes 
a  republic,  nor  of  the  duties  self-government  invokes;  yet  you  crown 


14 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


him  with  the  rights  of  American  citizenship,  rights  for  which  your  own 
mothers,  wives,  sisters,  and  daughters  plead  in  vain. 

Landing  in  New  York  one  week  ago,  I  saw  400  steerage  passengers 
leave  the  vessel.  Dull  eyed,  heavy-visaged,  stooping  with  huge  bur- 
dens and  the  oppressions  they  endured  in  the  Old  World,  they  stood  in 
painful  contrast  with  the  group  of  brilliant  women  on  their  way  to  the 
International  Council  just  held  here  in  Washington.  I  thought,  as  this 
long  line  passed  by,  of  the  speedy  transformation  the  genial  influences 
of  equality  would  effect  in  the  appearance  of  these  men,  of  the  new  dig- 
nity they  would  acquire,  with  a  voice  in  the  laws  under  which  they  live, 
and  I  rejoiced  for  them ;  but  bitter  reflections  filled  my  mind  when  I 
thought  these  men  are  the  future  rulers  of  our  daughters;  these  will  in- 
terpret the  civil  and  criminal  codes  by  which  they  will  be  governed; 
these  will  be  our  future  judges  and  jurors  to  try  young  girls  in  our  courts 
for  the  crime  of  infanticide,  for  trial  by  a  jury  of  her  peers  has  never  yet 
in  the  history  of  the  world  been  vouchsafed  to  woman.  Here  is  a  right 
so  ancient  that  it  is  difficult  to  trace  its  origin  in  history,  a  right  so 
sacred  that  tbe  humblest  criminal  may  choose  his  juror.  But,  alas  for 
the  daughters  of  the  people,  their  judges,  advocates,  jurors,  must  be  men, 
and  for  them  there  is  no  appeal.  But  this  is  only  one  wrong  among 
many  inevitable  in  a  disfranchised  class.  It  is  impossible  for  you,  gentle- 
men, to  appreciate  the  humiliations  women  suffer  at  every  turn. 

My  joy  in  reaching  my  native  land  and  meeting  dear  friends  and  family 
once  more  was  shadowed  by  that  vision  on  the  w^harf  and  by  the  knowl- 
edge that  by  the  thousands  still  they  come,  and  from  lands  where  woman, 
as  a  mere  beast  of  burden,  is  infinitely  more  degraded  than  by  any  possi- 
bility she  can  be  here.  Do  you  wonder,  in  view  of  what  the  character 
of  our  future  law-makers  may  be,  that  we  are  filled  with  apprehensions 
of  coming  evil,  and  that  we  feel  that  there  is  no  time  to  be  lost,  if  our 
Saxon  fathers  ever  propose  to  throw  around  us  the  protecting  power  of 
law  and  Constitution  ? 

The  next  generation  of  women  will  not  argue  with  their  rulers  as 
patiently  as  we  have  done,  and  to  so  little  purpose  for  half  a  century. 
You  have  now  the  power  to  settle  this  quest  on  by  moral  influences,  by 
wise  legislation.  But,  if  you  can  not  be  aroused  to  its  serious  considera- 
tion, like  every  other  step  in  progress,  it  will  eventually  be  settled  by 
violence.  The  wild  enthusiasm  of  woman  can  be  used  for  evil  as  well 
as  good.  To  day,  you  have  the  power  to  guide  and  direct  it  into  chan- 
nels of  true  patriotism,  but  in  future,  with  all  the  elements  of  discontent 
now  gathering  from  foreign  lands,  you  will  have  the  scenes  of  the 
French  Commune  repeated  in  our  land.  What  women,  exasperated 
with  a  sense  of  injustice,  have  done,  in  dire  extremities  in  tlie  nations 
of  the  Old  World,  they  will  do  here. 

The  justice  and  moderation  of  our  demands  have  always  seemed  to 
me  so  apparent  that  the  bare  statement  should  have  sufficed  long  ago. 
The  protracted  struggle  through  which  we  have  passed,  and  our  labors 
not  yet  crowned  with  success,  seems  to  me  sometimes  like  a  painful 
dream  in  which  one  strives  to  run  and  yet  stands  still,  incapable  alike 
of  jBScaping  or  meeting  the  impending  danger.  I  would  not  pain  your 
ears  with  a  rehearsal  of  the  hopes  ofttimes  deferred  and  shadowed  with 
fear,  of  the  brightest  anticipations  again  and  again  disai)pointed.  I 
will  leave  it  to  your  imagination  to  picture  to  yourselves  how  you 
would  feel  if  you  had  had  a  case  in  court,  a  bill  before  some  legislative 
body,  or  a  political  aspiration,  for  nearly  half  a  century,  with  a  con- 
tinual succession  of  adverse  decisions,  while  law  and  common  justice 
were  wholly  on  your  side.   Such,  honorable  gentlemen,  is  our  case. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


15 


Every  point  of  constitutional  law  has  been  argued  over  and  over,  not 
only  by  our  coadjutors,  but  by  some  of  the  ablest  men  in  the  nation. 
These  arguments  still  remain  unanswered. 

It  is  fair  to  suppose  that,  understanding  the  provisions  of  the  Consti- 
tution, you  know  that  women  being  persons  born  and  naturalized  in 
this  country  are  citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the  State  wherein 
they  reside,  and  that  they  have  the  same  inalienable  right  to  life,  lib- 
erty, and  happiness,  to  self  government  and  self  protection  that  each 
of  you  possesses.  Like  you,  women  pay  taxes  and  the  penalty  of  their 
own  crimes.  If  they  commit  theft  or  murder  they  are  imprisoned  and 
hung.  If  compelled  to  represent  themselves  on  the  gallows,  why  not 
at  the  polls?  Surely  the  latter  duty  could  be  much  more  gracefully 
discharged  than  the  former. 

In  looking  over  the  majority  reports  I  find  the  chief  subterfuge  of 
some  of  our  opponents  is  that  woman  would  be  a  dangerous  element  in 
politics. 

First.  They  fear  the  vicious  women,  as  it  is  supposed  that  they  would 
rally  a  mighty  multitude  and  all  go  to  the  polls,  drive  all  the  virtuous 
women  away,  completely  demoralize  the  men,  and  sap  the  foundations 
of  party  platforms  and  political  life.  The  women  of  the  French  revo- 
lution are  supposed  to  illustrate  what  this  class  would  do. 

Second.  They  fear  the  fashionable  women,  because  they  would  vote 
for  handsome  men,  make  their  parlors  symposiums  for  the  discussion  of 
questions  of  political  economy,  sacrifice  their  country  to  personal  ambi- 
tion and  family  aggrandizement,  and  spend  so  much  time  in  the  galler- 
ies of  legislative  assemblies  as  to  distract  the  attention  of  statesmen 
from  the  great  work  of  government. 

Third.  They  fear  religious,  devout  women,  because  they  would 
destroy  the  secular  nature  of  our  Government  by  introducing  the  name 
of  God  into  the  Constitution,  and  establishing  religious  tests  for  polit- 
ical parties  and  platforms. 

Fourth.  They  fear  married  women,  because  they  would  vote  with 
their  husbands,  and  thus  merely  double  the  vote,  or  they  would  vote 
directly  opposite,  and  thus  destroy  the  family  relation,  which  in  either 
view  would  be  a  public  and  social  calamity. 

Fifth.  The  colored  women.  After  wasting  reams  t)f  paper  and  an 
immense  amount  of  brain  force  in  drawing  up  the  fourteenth  amend- 
ment expressly  to  keep  this  class  out  of  the  body  politic,  it  would  be 
most  aggravating,  after  twenty  years  of  safety,  to  find  them  citizens  of 
the  United  States  under  this  very  amendment. 

Though  I  believe  in  universal  suffrage,  yet  I  am  willing  you  should 
begin  the  experiment  of  womanhood  suffrage  with  the  smallest  minority 
you  deem  sale,  so  that  by  enfranchising  some  women  you  overturn  the 
present  aristocracy  of  sex. 

Well,  gentlemen,  to  make  the  first  practical  step  for  you  as  easy  as 
possible,  why  not  exclude  these  five  classes  for  the  present  and  begin 
your  experiment  "with  spinsters  and  widows"  who  are  householders. 
This  is  the  basis  on  which  England  extends  municipal  suffrage  to  women. 
You  have  the  power  to  extend  and  withhold  the  suffrage,  as  jou 
choose ;  there  is  no  reason  why  you  should  begin  with  universal  suf- 
frage for  women.  We  can  not  ask  you  to  be  more  generous  to  us  than 
you  have  been  to  your  own  sex.  Men  at  one  time  voted  on  qualifica- 
tions of  property,  education,  color,  but  each  in  turn  were  abolished  in 
some  States,  and  in  some  States  still  remain,  except  color,  which  was 
abolished  for  men  by  the  fourteenth  amendment. 


16 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


Tbough  my  coadjutors  all  believe  in  universal  suffrage,  yet  I  think 
we  should  be  williug  to  let  you  start  with  si)iusters  and  widows  who 
are  householders.  Having  homes  of  their  own  it  is  fair  to  suppose  that 
they  are  industrious,  common-sense  women,  neither  vicious,  fashionable, 
nor  ambitious  for  family  position,  women  who  love  their  country  (having 
no  husbands  to  love)  better  than  themselves.  With  this  class,  you  es- 
cape all  danger  of  family  upheavals  on  the  one  side  and  doubling  the 
vote  on  the  other.  In  this  way,  by  admitting  some  women  into  political 
life,  we  overturn  the  aristocracy  of  sex. 

Do  you  realize,  gentlemen,  that  in  establishing  manhood  suffrage  you 
made  all  men  sovereigns  and  all  women  subjects'?  This,  the  most  odious 
form  of  aristocracy  that  the  world  ever  saw,  is  the  only  one  we  have; 
an  aristocracy  that  makes  all  men,  black  and  white,  foreign  and  native, 
lettered  and  unlettered,  washed  and  unwashed,  virtuous  and  vicious, 
the  rulers  of  refined,  educated,  native-born  women  j  an  aristocracy  that 
destroys  the  happiness  of  social  life,  exalting  the  son  above  the  mother 
who  bore  him,  engendering  an  insidious  contempt  for  woman  among  all 
classes  expressed  in  the  debates  on  this  question  at  every  fireside,  in 
the  halls  of  legislation,  in  our  laws  and  literature,  alike  in  poetry  and 
prose,  most  depressing  to  sensitive  women,  insulting  to  those  who  have 
a  proper  self-respect,  and  alike  exasperating  to  all. 

In  the  history  of  the  race  there  has  been  no  struggle  for  liberty  like 
this.  Whenever  the  interest  of  the  ruling  classes  has  induced  them  to 
confer  new  rights  on  a  subject  class  it  has  been  done  with  no  effort 
on  the  part  of  latter.  Neither  the  American  slave  nor  the  English 
laborer  demanded  the  right  of  suffrage.  It  was  given  in  both  cases  to 
strengthen  the  liberal  party.  The  philanthropy  of  the  few  may  have 
entered  into  those  reforms,  but  politicial  expediency  carried  both  meas- 
ures. Women,  on  the  contrary,  have  fought  their  own  battles ;  and  in 
their  rebellion  against  existing  conditions  have  inaugurated  the  most 
fundamental  revolution  the  world  has  ever  witnessed.  The  magnitude 
and  multiplicity  of  the  changes  involved  make  the  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  success  seem  almost  insurmountable. 

The  narrow  self-interest  of  all  classes  is  opposed  to  the  sovereignty 
of  woman.  The  rulers  in  the  state  are  not  willing  to  share  their  power 
with  a  class  equal,  if  not  superior,  to  themselves,  over  which  they  could 
never  hope  for  absolute  control,  and  whose  methods  of  government 
might  in  many  respects  differ  from  their  own.  The  anointed  leaders 
in  the  church  are  equally  hostile  to  freedom  for  a  sex  supposed  for  wise 
purposes  to  have  been  subordinated  by  divine  decree.  The  capitalist 
in  the  world  of  work  holds  the  key  to  the  trades  and  professions  and 
undermines  the  power  of  labor  unions  in  their  struggles  for  shorter 
hours  and  fairer  wages  by  substituting  the  cheap  labor  of  a  disfran- 
chised class  that  can  not  organize  its  forces,  thus  making  wife  and  sister 
rivals  of  husband  and  brother  in  the  industries,  to  the  detriment  of  both 
classes.    Of  the  autocrat  in  the  home,  John  Stuart  Mill  has  well  said : 

No  ordinary  man  is  willing  to  find  at  his  own  fireside  an  equal  in  the  person  he 
calls  wife. 

This  society  is  based  on  this  fourfold  bondage  of  woman,  making 
liberty  and  equality  for  her  antagonistic  to  every  organized  institution. 
Where,  then,  can  we  rest  the  lever  with  which  to  lift  one-half  of  human- 
ity from  these  depths  of  degradation,  but  on  that  columbiad  of  our 
political  life — the  ballot — which  makes  every  citizen  who  holds  it  a  full- 
armed  monitor  [Ai)plause.] 

Miss  Anthony.  I  would  say  to  the  committee  that  Mrs.  Stanton 
stands  ready  to  answer  any  questions  you  may  choose  to  ask  her.  I 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


17 


see  Senator  Brown  has  come  in  ;  I  am  happy  to  see  him.    Has  he  any 
questions  to  ask  of  Mrs.  Stanton  ? 
Senator  Brown.  I  believe  I  have  no  questions  to  ask. 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  SCATCHERD. 

Miss  Anthony.  If  the  committee  have  no  questions  to  ask  Mrs. 
Stanton,  I  should  like  to  present  to  them  representatives  from  the  dif- 
ferent countries  of  the  old  world.  First,  1  will  introduce  Mrs.  Alice 
Scatcherd,  of  Leeds,  England.  She  is  here  to  represent  the  Edinburgh 
Women's  Suffrage  Society;  also  Yorkshire,  Darlington,  and  Southport 
Women's  Liberal  Associations,  the  parent  society  of  which  is  the  Wo- 
men's Liberal  Federation,  with  Mrs.  Gladstone  as  the  president. 

Mrs.  Scatcherd.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  I  deem  it  a  great 
privilege  to  be  allowed  to  speak  before  this  committee  for  a  few  mo- 
ments. We  foreign  delegates  have  had  a  most  wonderful  experience 
during  the  past  week,  but  it  did  not  take  that  experience  to  tell  us  what 
we  already  knew  before,  that  the  women  of  this  great  Republic  have  in 
many  respects  advantages  over  the  women  of  the  Old  World.  We 
came  expecting  to  learn  much,  and  we  have,  indeed,  learned  much  from 
the  women  of  your  country.  But  on  the  other  hand  we  see  that  there 
are  some  respects  in  which  we  English  women,  at  any  rate,  have  the 
advantage  of  them,  and  I  think  that  is  notably  in  the  matter  of  voting 
at  municipal  and  local  elections. 

There  never  was  a  time  in  our  country,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to 
ascertain,  when  women  who  paid  the  same  rates  and  taxes  as  men  had 
not  the  same  local  vote.  That  has  been  our  right  from  time  immemorial ; 
and  whatever  extension  of  local  government  is  made  in  our  country,  no 
one  ever  dreams  of  depriving  those  women  rate-payers,  namely,  the 
widows  and  spinsters  who  pay  rates,  of  having  the  franchise.  In  the 
year  1835,  when  the  municipal  reform  act  was  brought  in,  an  attempt 
was  made  to  deprive  women  for  the  time  of  that  vote.  It  was  done 
more  from  carelessness  than  intention.  Various  localities  were  then 
turned  into  municipalities,  and  for  a  time  it  occurred  that  women  who 
had  voted  in  the  locality  were  deprived,  when  that  locality  was  turned 
into  a  town,  of  the  vote.  Directly  attention  was  called  to  this  matter 
it  was  remedied  at  once.  When  the  district  of  South wark  was  turned 
into  a  municipal  borough,  the  majority  of  the  householders  were  women, 
and  it  struck  our  legislators  as  absurd  to  give  only  to  a  minority  of  the 
householders  the  vote  in  local  matters. 

Women  also  vote  at  the  school-board  elections  with  us,  and  I  must 
say  that  they  do  use  their  vote  largely  and  well,  and  take  an  especial  in- 
terest in  these  elections.  We  have  not  found,  because  women  mix  freely 
with  men  on  those  occasions,  any  of  the  terrible  things  which  were  pre- 
dicted to  happen.  Women  sit  upon  the  school-boards  and  take  an  active 
part  in  the  education  of  our  country. 

But,  more  than  that,  we  women  also  have  a  vote  for  what  we  call  our 
poor-law  boards — our  boards  of  guardians — and  women  sit  upon  those 
boards.  And  here  let  me  say  that  our  men  are  beginning  to  realize 
that  they  can  not  settle  great  social  problems  without  calling  in  the 
help  of  women;  and  that  wherever  children,  the  aged,  the  sick,  the 
poor,  the  erring,  the  fallen,  and  the  weak  are  concerned,  there  is  woman's 
right  place.  (Applause.) 

It  has  often  been  said  that  women  would  not  vote  at  elections,  nor 
take  part  in  them  if  they  had  the  right  to  do  so.  My  experience  is  ex- 
S.  Rep.  2543  2 


18 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


actly  the  contrary.  Our  women  do  vote  in  quite  as  large  a  percentage 
as  our  men  vote.  If  an  election  is  lost  in  any  ward  of  our  town  you 
usually  Lear  the  candidate  who  has  lost  say  it  was  the  women  who 
have  not  come  forward  and  who  have  not  supported  him ;  it  is  the 
women  who  have  really  lost  him  his  election.  Practically  we  have  won 
both  the  Conservatives  and  Liberals  to  accepting  the  right  of  women 
to  vote.  If  the  franchise  were  granted  to  our  women  rate-payers — and 
that  is  all  we  ask  for  in  England  at  present — there  would  be  found  one 
woman  to  every  six  or  seven  men  voters,  and  I  really  do  think  .with  a 
majority  like  that  in  their  favor  the  men  are  quite  able  to  take  care  of 
their  own  interests.  [Laughter.] 

We  have  had  actual  experiment  of  parliamentary  voting  in  the  Isle  of 
Man.  I,  myself,  ran  over  there  at  the  time  of  the  passing  of  the  reform 
bill  for  that  island,  which,  as  you  know,  possesses  its  own  house  of  legis- 
lature and  makes  its  own  laws,  subject  to  the  approval  of  our  Imperial 
Parliament ;  and  there  it  was  not  the  women  occupiers,  those  who  paid 
rates,  who  were  admitted  to  the  franchise,  but  only  the  women  owners 
of  property,  of  which  in  that  small  little  island  there  are  six  hundred 
and  forty- two.  They  have  voted,  and  none  of  the  evil  things  that  were 
predicted  as  going  to  happen  have  happened,  but  I  believe  they  have 
voted  with  very  great  benefit  to  the  government  of  that  little  kingdom. 

Well,  as  we  have  not  got  our  parliamentary  franchise  yet,  the  women 
of  our  Kingdom  have  not  waited  for  that,  but  take  a  very  active  part 
indeed  in  political  matters.  The  conservative  women,  the  women  of 
high  degree  and  title  and  great  position  in  our  land,  have  come  for- 
ward, and  going  on  their  mission  have  formed  what  is  called  the  Prim- 
rose League.  It  has  titles,  badges,  and  lodges,  and  what  not.  But 
there  is  the  great  fact  that  a  very  large  political  movement  is  going 
on  among  the  aristocratic  women  of  our  country,  and  that  they  take  a 
great  interest,  a  very  active  interest,  in  political  matters. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  what  we  call  the  Woman's  Liberal  Asso- 
ciations, which  are  founded  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  educating  women 
in  sound  Liberal  principles,  and  taking  part  in  all  the  local  elections, 
and  indeed  in  the  parliamentary  elections,  too.  I  am  bound  to  say 
that,  while  those  women  read  papers  and  hold  discussions  once  a  month 
upon  i)olitical  subjects  which  affect  women,  their  meetings  are  not  con- 
fined to  women.  Men  find  them  so  interesting  that  they  attend  in  large 
number,  and  take  part  in  the  discussions  as  well  as  women. 

I  ought  to  say  that  Mrs.  Gladstone  is  the  president  of  the  Woman's 
Liberal  Federation.  [Applause.] 

To  tell  women  to  let  politics  alone  is  really  to  reduce  one-half  of  the 
race  into  actual  and  practical  slavery.  I,  mys^f,  should  have  been 
forced  to  take  an  interest  in  politics  immediately  I  landed  in  your 
country,  if  I  had  not  done  so  before.  When  I  opened  my  luggage  for 
examination,  it  was  very  kindly  and  politely  examined  by  a  woman  ex- 
aminer; but  I  had  put  in  my  large  trunk  my  husband's  dress  suit  merely 
for  convenience  sake,  as  he  was  to  follow  me  a  week  later  in  the  Um- 
bria,  1  was  taken  from  one  office  to  another  and  had  to  pay  $6  duty 
upon  that  dress  suit.  Kow,  gentlemen,  that  was  a  question  which 
would  have  made  me  think  about  free  trade  or  fair  trade  if  I  had  never 
thought  about  it  before.  [Laughter.] 

Holding,  as  I  do,  that  every  home  is  better  for  the  influence  of  men 
and  women,  I  also  hold  that  all  local  councils  are  better  for  the  influence 
of  men  and  women,  and  that  national  councils  are  the  better  for  that  in- 
fluence. I  do  not  speak  after  one  or  two  years'  work  or  after  recent  con- 
viction, but  after  twenty-three  years  of  hard  and  faithful  work  for  the 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


19 


town  and  the  district  and  the  county  in  which  I  live.  Living,  as  I  do,  in 
the  heart  of  a  great  manufacturing  district,  and  looking  on  it  not  in  the 
mere  surface  light,  but  grasi^iug  all  the  circumstances  that  aftect  the 
district,  I  must  say  that  at  every  turn  I  am  met  with  the  conclusion  that 
the  franchise  is  necessary  for  women,  not  only  to  promote  those  social 
reforms  and  improvements  which  she  has  in  her  mind,  but  also  to  pro- 
tect such  interests  as  sh6  already  possesses. 

I  have  never  been  one  of  those  who  have  struggled  for  exact  equality 
between  men  and  women.  I  do  not  think,  gentlemen,  that  we  are  equal 
in  any  way;  rather  are  we  equivalent,  men  and  women,  to  each  other. 
Men  have  done  wonderful  things.  They  have  laid  the  material  founda- 
tions of  the  social  structure ;  and  as  I  come  across  in  the  grand  ships 
which  have  been  built,  as  I  travel  on  your  railways,  I  never  cease  to 
admire  the  foresight  and  the  ability,  the  thought  and  the  forethought 
which  you  have  evinced  ;  but  you  can  not  now  proceed  as  you  ought 
to  do  unless  you  take  into  council  the  women  of  your  country.  You 
can  not  build  the  superstructure  upon  the  foundations  which  you  have 
laid  unless  you  consult  women. 

Mrs.  Stanton  has  mentioned  many  of  the  social  points  on  which  we 
have  views,  and  we  long  to  lay  those  views  before  you  to  have  them 
put  in  practice,  and  1  do  hope  the  time  is  coming  when  good  men,  those 
men  who  think  seriously,  will  gradually  come  and  say  to  us,  ^'  what  do 
you  think  upon  these  social  problems"  ?  Will  you  come  and  will  you 
help  us  solve  them 

I  do  not  wish  to  take  up  any  more  of  your  time.  I  am  very  grateful, 
indeed,  for  having  been  allowed  to  speak  to  this  committee,  and  to  tes- 
tify here  before  all  these  American  women,  and  before  you  gentlemen, 
our  great  gratitude,  and  how  much  we  have  learned  in  your  country, 
and  how  our  thoughts  have  been  drawn  together  at  the  great  council 
which  has  just  been  held.  [Applause.] 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  GROTH. 

Miss  Anthony.  Now  I  want  to  go  across  the  narrow  bit  of  water  and 
introduce  to  you  Mrs.  S.  Maglesson  Groth,  of  Norway. 

Mrs.  Groth.  Gentlemen,  I  have  seen  very  splendid  things  in  America. 
I  have  seen  evidences  of  your  friendship  and  of  your  independence.  I 
come  to  tell  you  that  a  law  has  been  passed  in  Norway  and  all  men  are 
in  favor  of  woman  suffrage  in  Norway,  and  it  has  been  very  highly  suc- 
cessful. [Applause.] 

STATEMENT  OF  MISS  TRYGG. 

Miss  Anthony.  Miss  Alii  Trygg,  of  Finland,  is  not  exactly  a  dele- 
gate, but  she  is  a  Finn.  The  delegate.  Baroness  Alexandra  Gripen- 
berg,  is  at  the  Riggs  House,  and  has  not  been  able  to  attend  a  single 
meeting ;  but  Miss  Trygg,  her  intimate  friend,  who  is  an  educator  from 
the  little  country  of  Finland,  is  here,  and  so  I  want  to  introduce  to  you 
Finland. 

Miss  Trygg.  Gentlemen,  I  do  not  know  English  very  well,  but  I  come 
to  speak  to  you  a  few  words  as  well  as  I  can.  If  I  could  speak  it  well 
I  should  have  very  much  to  tell  you.  I  am  a  daughter  of  Finland, 
which  is  united  with  Russia,  and  you  know  what  that  means  so  far  as 
liberty  is  concerned.  I  can  tell  you  what  is  the  greatest  momert  in  my 
whole  life  J  it  is  when  I  stand  here  under  this  ceiling  in  a  building 


20 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


where  laws  are  made  for  a  free  people,  but  your  trouble  is  they  are  now 
made  for  a  half  of  the  people  ami  not  made  for  the  whole  of  the  people. 
I  can  not  tell  you  how  much  I  enjoy  my  being  here  in  America.  I  hope 
I  shall  be  able  to  come  back  in  ten  years  to  the  half-century  jubilee, 
and  then  I  shall  see  all  the  women  in  this  great  country  represented, 
and  then  they  need  not  come  here  and  ask  you  any  more  to  give  these 
rights  to  women.    I  hope  to  see  that  day.    [Api)lause.]    I  thank  you. 


STATEMENT  OF  MME.  BOGELOT. 

Miss  Anthony.  "N^ow  I  want  to  introduce  to  you  Madame  Bogelot, 
of  Paris,  France. 

Madame  Bogelot  addressed  the  committee  in  French. 

Gentlemen  :  1  am  here  to  represent  the  women  of  France  who  are 
working  on  behalf  of  prisoners  of  their  own  sex.  We  feel  that  the  more 
oppressed  is  the  woman  by  her  own  failure  and  by  the  want  of  pity  in 
those  about  her,  so  much  the  more  does  she  need  the  help  and  strength 
of  all  good  women  to  save  her  from  despair.  We  feel  also  that  the  laws 
of  our  country  are  very  uujust  to  many  women,  and  that  until  women 
have  a  voice  in  the  making  of  laws  they  will  continue  to  be  so.  We 
leel  also  that  all  our  efforts  for  uplifting  women  are  crii)pled  by  the  in- 
ferior position  of  women  to  that  of  men  before  the  law. 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  CHANT. 

Miss  Anthony.  We  have  three  delegates  from  England,  but  I  am 
very  sorry  to  say  to  you  that  the  third  one  is  overcome  by  our  climate 
or  our  cordial  welcome  or  something,  and  she  is  not  able  to  be  here  this 
morning,  and  that  is  Mrs.  Dilke.  I  now  have  the  pleasure  of  introduc- 
ing to  you  Mrs.  Laura  Ormiston  Chant,  of  London,  who  is  present  here 
with  us  by  authority  as  a  delegate  of  Edinburgh,  of  which  society  Mrs. 
Priscilla  Bright  McLaren  is  the  president.  Mrs.  McLaren,  as  you 
recognize  by  the  name,  is  the  sister  of  John  and  Jacob  Bright.  Mrs. 
Chant  also  represents  the  Glasgow  Women's  Suffrage  Society,  the 
British  Women's  Temperance  Society,  the  l^fational  Vigilance  Associa- 
tion, as  well  as  two  or  three  others,  including  the  Women's  Peace  and 
International  Arbitration  Society. 

Mrs.  Chant.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen:  It  is  a  great  thing, 
surely,  to  be  allowed,  as  an  English  woman,  to  stand  here  and  plead  in 
the  name  of  American  women  for  that  which  we  hope  American  women 
will  soon  enjoy.  I  should  like  to  remind  you  that  those  of  us  women 
who  are  striving  to  gain  the  suffrage  for  women  are  not  the  indifferent, 
the  vicious,  or  the  fashionable,  of  whom  Mrs.  Cady  Stanton  spoke,  but 
we  are  women  of  all  countries  who  are  prominent  in  all  philanthropic 
work,  all  educational  work,  all  literary  work,  and  all  work  that  is  for 
the  uplifting  and  advancement  of  humanity  in  any  way.  There  are 
very  few  of  us  women — I  can  speak  for  Great  Britain  and  Ireland — who 
have  not  noble  ancestors  who  have  stood  prominently  forth  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  world  as  advocates  of  freedom  of  all  kinds,  and  we  think  it 
a  fitting  and  beautiful  thing  to  day  that  we,  their  daughters  and  grand- 
daughters and  great-granddaughters  should  be  standing  here,  some  of 
us  certainly,  under  the  roof  of  a  building  which  embodies  the  liberties 
of  as  great  and  magnificent  a  national  constitution  as  the  world  has 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


21 


yet  seen.  It  is  a  fitting  thing  that  we  should  be  allowed  the  honor  of 
standing  before  you  to  day,  echoing  faintly,  it  may  be,  the  voices  of 
those,  our  men,  who  have  gone  belbre  us,  who  sounded  the  first  clarion 
notes  of  liberty,  of  which  we  hope  we  are  giving  the  echoes. 

I  stand  here  as  the  grCat-grandniece  of  one  of  the  greatest  orators 
and  clearest  and  wisest  statesmen  that  Europe  has  known,  and  that  is 
Edmund  Burke  [applause].  It  seems  to  me  an  almost  overwhelming 
humility  that  I  should  be  able  to  echo  faintly  the  magnificent  impeach- 
ment that  he  made  against  Warren  Hastings,  in  our  House  of  Commons, 
on  behalf  of  the  oppressed  women  of  Hindostan,  in  this  my  passionate 
appeal  on  behalf  of  oppressed  women  all  over  the  world.  We  women 
feel  that  while  women  have  no  voice  whatever  in  making  the  laws,  the 
central  necessity  of  the  human  life  is  in  great  danger  of  being  taken 
away  from  them,  the  necessity  of  earning  bread  and  havingland  on  which 
to  live.  No  one  has  denied  to  women  the  right  of  burial,  and  in  that  one 
sad  necessity  of  human  life  they  stand  on  an  equal  footing  with  men ; 
but  I  see  in  our  England  that  while  women  have  no  recognized  voice  in 
making  law  by  helping  appoint  the  law-makers,  the  power  of  women  to 
earn  bread  and  possess  a  home  is  in  constant  danger,  and  is  being  les- 
sened more  and  more,  as  th3  increasing  electoral  righto  of  men  place 
greater  differences  between  the  sexes.  Oh,  I  wish  you  could  hear  be- 
hind my  voice,  1  wish  you  could  feel  behind  my  heart  and  my  thought, 
the  agonies  and  sorrows  of  those  thousands  of  poor  and  oppressed  and 
downcast  women  in  our  England  who  come  to  your  shores  as  a  last  re- 
sort, to  find  that  which  the  Old  World  has  denied  them !  We  are  op- 
pressed in  our  country  by  centuries  of  feudalism  and  monarchism,  and 
you  are  not.  We  are  old;  we  are  in  the  sunset  of  a  grand  past;  and 
you  are  in  the  glorious  dawn  somewhere  near  the  morning  and  advanc- 
ing towards  a  day  of  which  the  world  has  never  known*  ihe  equal  for  its 
splendor. 

Therefore  we  pray  to  you,  by  the  lessons  taught  by  ancient  Egypt, 
where  they  recognized  and  did  not  hesitate  to  put  into  force  the  equality 
of  women,  by  ancient  Greece  where  women  obtained  an  educational 
height  that  they  have  not  yet  attained  anywhere  else  so  long  as  they 
were  not  the  women  of  the  family,  and  by  ancient  Eome,  where  women 
had  such  power  that  the  life  of  a  man  in  the  arena  might  be  dependent 
on  the  upturning  or  downtarning  of  the  thumb  of  the  frivolous  or  the 
vicious  woman  in  the  amphitheater,  to  be  wiser  than  them  all,  and  free 
womanhood  from  the  artificial  disability  of  sex  in  national  life.  To-day 
the  women  who  are  laying  down  their  lives  for  the  good  of  their  coun- 
try in  temperance,  in  purity,  and  in  education,  aye,  in  politics,  too,  be- 
cause we  are  most  of  us  women  who  feel  that  what  religion  is  to  the 
individual,  the  duty  to  God  and  man,  that  politics  is  to  the  nation,  duty 
to  God  and  man  also  [applause] — we  ask  that  the  religion  of  the  nation 
shall  not  exclude  women  any  longer. 

When  I  saw  your  magnificent  churches  here  yesterday  opened  to  the 
voice  of  women  in  a  way  in  which  our  English  churches  are  not,  I  could 
only  hope  that  we  may  be  able  to  take  back  over  the  Atlantic  the  ex- 
ample of  the  new  country  into  the  old  to  quicken  the  movement  there 
and  teach  the  great  lesson  that  offices  should  be  filled  by  those  whose 
gifts  render  them  fit  for  the  post,  irrespective  of  sex. 

In  the  enfranchisement  of  women  is  the  race  between  the  Old  World 
and  the  New.  We  possess  to-day  a  majority  in  our  English  House  of 
Commons  on  behalf  of  woman  suffrage,  and  we  have  never  possessed  that 
before ;  but  what  blocks  the  way  is  the  cause  of  that  oppressed  conn- 


22 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


try,  Ireland,  and  I,  for  one,  feel  that  I  would  rather  that  Ireland  should 
continue  to  block  the  way  till  in  her  emancipation  from  centuries  of 
injustice  the  great  i)rincii)le  of  freedom  for  all  without  resi)ect  of  per- 
son, race,  or  sex  has  been  vindicated  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  by  grant- 
ing her  home  rule.  Here  is  the  old  mother  with  her  grand  past,  and 
the  daughter  with  her  magnificent  future.  If  you  win  this  race  we 
sliall  bless  you,  and  you  will  see  not  only  England,  Scotland,  and  Ire- 
land, but  Kussia,  Germany,  Italy,  and  Spain  following  in  your  lead. 
Do  not  let  us  fail.  By  all  you  have  held  most  sacred  and  beautiful  in 
the  women  who  have  loved  you  and  made  life  possible  for  you — for 
their  sake  and  in  their  name,  I  do  entreat  you  no  longer  to  allow  one  of 
your  grandest  women  to  plead  for  over  half  a  century,  but  say  "  th« 
past  has  been  a  long  night  of  wrong,  the  day  has  come  and  the  hour  in 
which  justice  shall  conquer."  Open  your  arms  wide  now  and  take  iuto 
the  i)rotection  of  the  law  the  womanhood  as  well  as  the  manhood  of 
your  country.  [Applause.] 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  JULIA  WARD  HOWE. 

Miss  Anthony.  Now,  gentlemen,  I  have  the  pleasure  of  introducing 
to  you  the  woman  who  has  stood  at  the  head  of  literature  in  Boston, 
the  woman  who  twenty-five  years  ago  wrote  "The  Battle  Hymn  of  the 
Kepublic,"  the  president  of  the  Association  for  the  Advancement  of 
Women,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  of  Boston. 

Mrs.  Howe.  Gentlemen,  I  had  not  expected  to  speak  here  to-day, 
and  my  heart  has  been  full  enough  with  the  words  of  others  that  have 
been  here  uttered  ;  but  a  single  word  will  enable  me  to  cast  in  my  voice 
with  theirs  withpall  the  emphasis  that  my  life  and  such  power  as  I  have 
given  it  will  enable  me  to  add. 

Gentlemen,  what  a  voice  you  have  hereto-day  for  universal  suffrage. 
Think  that  not  only  we  American  women,  your  own  kindred,  appear 
here,  and  you  know  what  they  represent,  but  these  foremost  women 
from  other  countries,  representing  not  only  the  native  intelligence  and 
character  of  those  countries,  but  deep  and  careful  study,  and  the  pre- 
cious experience  which  is  derived  from  earnest  labor  for  the  good  of 
society  and  for  the  elevation  of  the  race  5  and  think  that  between  them 
and  us,  who  are  for  suffrage,  there  is  entire  unanimity.  We  all  say  the 
same  words ;  we  all  are  for  the  same  thing. 

I  have  never  had  the  honor  to  speak  in  this  Capitol  of  our  dear,  glorious 
country  before ;  but  in  my  adopted  State  of  Massachusetts,  the  aspect 
of  the  legislature  is  not  unfamiliar  to  me.  How  many  times,  with  my 
colleagues,  have  I  toiled  up  those  steps,  and  have  got  more  "  leaves  to 
withdraw"  than  it  is  worth  while  to  count  here,  but  each  one  of  those 
counts  behind  us :  and  as  the  difiiculties  had  to  be  overcome,  as  the 
steps  that  had  to  be  taken  were  taken,  with  each  one  there  has  been 
one  cure  for  us  there,  and  so  we  all  pressed  onward  in  one  great  and 
fervent  hope,  which  is  a  deep  religious  hope,  and  which  I  am  sure  the 
oldest  and  most  honored  of  us  will  live  to  see  realized ;  and  as  we  speak 
not  only  together,  but  each  has  her  own  voice,  I  will  say  that  while  I 
desire  very  much  that  the  two  classes  mentioned  by  our  honored  chief, 
Mrs.  Stanton,  shall  be  enfranchised,  I  will  not  abate  one  jot  of  my  de- 
mand for  all  women  [applause] — not  that  I  love  spinsters  and  widows 
less,  but  that  I  love  all  woman  kind  more  [applause], 


WOMAN  SUFFllAGE. 


23 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  MERRICK. 

Miss  Anthony.  GentlemeD,  I  want  to  present  to  you  a  lady  whom  I 
see  sitting  here.  I  remember  when  I  talked  to  Senator  Brown  a  couple 
of  years  ago  he  said  he  did  not  know  a  woman  in  the  South,  in  all  the 
Gulf  States,  who  wanted  to  vote,  and  especially  in  Georgia.  Now,  1 
bring  you  up  a  woman  from  Louisiana  who  does  want  to  vote.  Sena- 
tors, Mrs.  Judge  Merrick,  of  New  Orleans. 

Senator  Brown.  With  great  deference,  I  think  you  state  it  a  little 
too  broadly.    I  said  the  number  was  not  very  large,  probably. 

Miss  Anthony.  But  1  want  to  show  you  at  least  one.  Mrs.  Mer- 
rick is  the  widow  of  a  man  who  prior  to  the  war  was  chief-justice  of 
Louisiana,  and  she  is  a  woman  who  stands  at  the  head  of  a  large  num- 
ber of  the  most  intelligent  and  cultivated  and  representative  women  of 
the  Gulf  States,  and  I  do  hope  that  our  Southern  members  of  Congress 
and  of  the  Senate  will  come  to  know  that  there  are  women  in  their 
midst  who  want  to  vote,  as  well  as  the  Northern  representatives,  who 
know  they  have  among  their  constituents  many  such  women. 

Mrs.  Merrick.  Honorable  gentlemen:  When  Miss  Anthony  says 
that  I  wish  to  vote,  she  says  the  truth.  If  any  one  asks  me  when  I  be- 
came a  convert,  I  will  say  that  I  believe  I  was  born  that  way.  I  have 
been  a  married  woman  for  forty  3  ears,  and  I  have  eight  grandchildren, 
and  my  husband  and  my  two  sons  and  my  brother  indorse  everything 
that  I  do  on  this  question,  but  only  of  late  years.  It  has  taken  those 
forty  years  to  bring  them  to  my  position  that  I  had  in  the  beginning, 
for  I  always  believed  that  woman  was  an  equal  factor,  and  when  she 
counts  in  the  church  and  when  she  counts  in  the  family,  she  ought  also 
to  count  in  the  government. 

But  you  have  heard  this  thing  over  and  over.  It  is  not  asking  too 
much  that  when  a  woman  is  admitted  to  the  tax-list  she  should  also  be 
admitted  to  the  ballot.  When  my  son  became  twenty-one  years  of  age 
we  were  in  the  North,  and  he  wanted  very  much  to  go  South  to  vote  for 
Cleveland.  His  father  was  unwilling  that  he  should,  but  I  used  my  in- 
fluence and  he  was  i^ermitted  to  go.  When  I  took  leave  of  him  I  said, 
"My  dear  son,  you  are  so  glad  you  are  going  to  vote,  being  twenty-one 
years  of  age,  and  now  you  are  going  South  to  vote  for  the  first  time ;  re- 
member that  your  mother  will  always  be  a  perpetual  minor  and  that  she 
feels  humiliated  and  mortified  on  that  account."  He  said,  "Mother,  I 
wish  you  could  vote."  I  said,  "  Well,  I  am  so  happy  in  having  so  young 
a  son  express  such  a  wish  that  I  can  do  without  voting  for  a  while." 
[Laughter.]  But  when  Miss  Anthony  invited  me  to  come  here  I  was 
sick  and  not  able  to  come.  My  son  said,  "Although  you  are  a  woman's 
rights  woman  why  should  you  commit  suicide  by  going  to  Washington 
with  that  dreadful  cold?"  I  said,  "My  son,  I  am  going  to  take  my 
chances.  Miss  Anthony  says  she  wants  to  see  a  Southern  woman  who 
wishes  to  vote,  and  I  am  going  to  stand  up  and  be  counted,  even  if  I 
have  such  a  cold  that  I  can  not  talk." 

Gentlemen,  you  are  very  kind  to  hear  this  Southern  woman  who  does 
not  bring  anything  but  her  simple  voice,  that  she  wants  the  ballot  for 
herself  and  for  her  granddaughters,  and  she  hopes  they,  at  least,  will  live 
to  see  the  time  when  they  will  have  it  if  I  do  not.  I  thank  you,  gen- 
tlemen. 


24 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


REMARKS  OF  MISS  ANTHONY. 

Miss  Anthony.  It  is  but  fair  for  me  to  state  that  in  this  room  there 
is  probably  at  least  one  woman  representing?  each  State  or  Territory  of 
this  Union.  I  think  during  the  sessions  of  the  council — we  have  been 
so  busy  that  we  have  not  had  time  to  look  it  up — but  we  have  not  a 
State  or  a  Territory  that  has  not  been  represented  in  the  meetings  du- 
ring the  past  week.  I  need  not  say  that  we  all  hope  that  this  first 
Congress  of  the  second  century  will  take  the  initiative  step  towards  se- 
curing the  enfranchisement  of  woman. 

I  want  to  say  in  conclusion  what  perhaps  I  need  not  say," that  I  hope 
this  committee  or  the  chairman  of  it,  will  make  a  motion  on  the  floor  of 
the  Senate  that  shall  secure  an  order  for  the  printing  of  a  good  large 
number  of  the  speeches  and  addresses  which  have  been  made  here  this 
morning.  This  convention,  this  year,  rounds  out  the  first  forty  years 
since  woman  began  to  make  a  public  demand  for  enfranchisement  in 
this  country,  and  therefore  it  is  fitting  that  your  honorable  committee 
shall  make  this  hearing  mark  this  epoch  by  thus  publishing  the  report 
of  the  xDroceedings.  1  wish  you  would  ask  leave  to  publish  a  hundred 
thousand  copies,  that  we  might  have  them  sent  to  every  school  district 
of  the  United  States.  But  if  you  can  not  bear  to  have  the  Government 
do  so  much  for  the  women  of  this  Republic  and  of  the  world,  ask  for  the 
largest  number  that  the  law  will  allow  you  to  get. 

I  thought  I  had  asked  a  representative  of  every  distant  country  to 
be  heard,  but  I  find  that  I  have  omitted  to  call  upon  Canada,  which  is 
not  distant.    I  now  i)resent  to  you  Mrs.  Keefer,  of  Toronto. 


STATEMENT  OF  MRS.  KEEFER. 

Mrs.  Keefer.  Mr.  Chairman  and  honorable  gentlemen  of  the  com- 
mittee:  I  think  that  I  am  an  American  citizen,  although  I  live  just 
across  the  line,  and  as  I  stood  in  your  House  of  Representatives  the 
other  day  and  watched  the  flag  over  the  head  of  the  Speaker,  I  won- 
dered to  myself  if  the  time  would  ever  come  when  the  beaver  and  maple 
leaf  would  find  a  place  somewhere  around  and,jtist  under  the  stars  and 
stripes.  I  am  so  glad  to  be  here  this  morning,  and  to  add  my  voice  to 
the  voices  of  your  own  women  who  have  been  pleading  with  you  for 
the  vote.  I  do  not  ask  the  vote  to  be  extended  to  spinsters  and  widows 
only.  I  do  not  ask  you  to  put  a  premium  on  unmarried  women,  al- 
though we  have  it  in  our  country.  I  ask  that  the  vote  may  be  extended 
to  all  women  as  it  is  to  all  men,  for  right  is  right,  and  you  can  not  make 
it  wrong,  and  you  can  not  make  a  part  wrong  of  a  whole  right. 

We  have  a  little  experience  in  our  country  in  regard  to  the  woman's 
vote,  and  we  know  that  it  is  one  of  the  very  best  factors  that  enter  into 
an  election.  We  have  seen  our  council  chambers  i)urified  of  a  great 
many  things  that  were  there  before.  We  have  seen  cleaner,  better, 
grander,  nobler  men  put  into  our  councils  all  through  the  province  of 
HOntario  because  of  the  woman's  vote. 

Men  and  brethren,  you  need  the  woman's  vote  here,  just  as  much  as 
we  need  the  woman's  vote  over  there.  I  know  that  a  great  many  of 
you  have  an  idea  that  if  we  women  vote  it  will  injure  us.  i^ou  think 
that  politics  have  got  into  such  a  muddle,  have  got  so  dirty  some  way 
or  other  thatthe  dirty  house  is  not  tit  for  us  to  live  in.  But  men  and 
brethren,  did  you  ever  see  a  dirty  house  that  was  fit  for  a  man  to  live 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


25 


iu  if  it  was  not  fit  for  a  woman,  and  did  you  ever  see  a  house  that  was 
clean  enough  for  a  man  that  was  too  dirty  for  a  woman  ?  i^ay,  further, 
did  you  ever  see  a  dirty  house  that  was  fit  for  a  man  to  live  in  until 
some  woman  or  other  had  got  into  it  and  cleaned  it  up  for  him?  [Ap- 
plause.] 

STATEMENT  OF  MISS  FRANCES  E.  WILLARD. 

Miss  Anthony.  The  committee  ask  to  hear  Miss  Willard,  and  I  ask 
her  to  please  come  forward. 

Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  here  stands  before  you  a  woman  who  is 
commander-in-chief  of  an  army  of  women  in  these  United  States,  who 
commands  to-day  an  army  of  250,000  women.  It  is  said  women  do  not 
want  to  vote,  but  this  woman  has  led  up  this  vast  army  to  the  ballot- 
box,  or  to  a  wish  to  get  there.  Gentlemen,  I  present  to  you  Miss  Wil- 
lard. 

Miss  Willard.  I  suppose  these  honorable  gentlemen  think  that  we 
women  want  the  earth,  when  we  only  want  half  of  it.  That  is  just  ex- 
actly where  we  stand.  We  call  their  attention  to  the  fact — I  do  not 
know  whether  it  has  been  brought  out  here  this  morning,  but  it  is  a 
fact — that  our  brethren  have  encroached  upon  the  sphere  of  woman. 
They  have  very  definitely  marked  out  that  sphere,  and  then  they  have 
proceeded  with  their  incursion  by  the  power  of  invention.  They  have 
taken  away  the  loom  and  the  spinning-jenny,  and  they  have  obliged 
Jenny  to  seek  her  occupation  somewhere  else  to  an  extent.  They  have 
set  even  the  tune  of  the  old  knitting-needle  to  humming  by  steam.  So 
that  we  women,  full  of  vigor  and  full  of  desire  to  be  active  and  useful 
and  to  re-act  upon  the  world  around  us,  finding  our  occupation  indus- 
trially largely  gone,  have  been  obliged  to  seek  out  a  new  territory 
and  to  pre-empt  from  the  sphere  of  our  brothers,  as  it  was  popularly 
supposed  to  be,  some  of  the  territory  that  they  have  hitherto  consid- 
ered their  own.  As  I  understand  it,  that  is  the  rationale  of  the  present 
crowding  in  of  these  women.  If  you  had  left  them  spinning-jennies 
and  looms  and  the  knitting-needle,  they  might  not  be  here.  But  you 
shrewd  Yankees  set  to  work  and  put  spindles  and  steam  at  your  serv- 
ice, and  lo  and  behold  we  need  more  occupation,  and  so  we  think  it 
will  be  very  desirable  indeed  that  you  should  let  us  lend  a  hand  in  the 
affairs  of  government. 

We  know  that  in  the  olden  time  when  force  was  at  the  fore,  and  had 
to  be,  women  were  at  a  discount,  but  we  accept  that  and  have  no  com- 
plaint to  make.  We  think,  however,  in  these  ^'piping  times  of  peace" 
women  may  well  pipe  up  and  may  be  heard;  and  your  presence,  "grave 
and  reverend  signiors"  and  Senators,  looking  at  us  and  beaming  upon 
us  so  kindly  and  giving  your  time  to  us  this  morning,  shows  that  you 
think  just  the  same. 

We  call  you  to  remember  a  certain  incident  in  politics,  namely,  that 
when  women  had  the  vote,  as  they  had  for  a  brief  space  in  Kew  Jersey, 
thanks  to  the  kindliness  of  the  Quakers,  who  always  thought  well  of 
women  and  marked  them  at  their  true  value,  it  was  the  decisive  vote 
of  women  in  New  Jersey  that  put  John  Quincy  Adams  in  the  great 
Executive  Mansion  at  Washington.  Then  he,  like  the  true  and  loyal 
man  he  was,  stood  up  and  argued  that  women  should  have  the  right  to 
pat  their  signature  to  petitions,  which  had  not  been  done  before.  He 
remembered  the  women  that  he  left  behind  him,  and  he  it  was  who, 
when  men  in  the  Capitol  at  Washington  said  that  if  women  put  their 
names  to  a  bit  of  paper  in  the  way  of  a  signature  to  a  petition  they 


2G 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


would  lose  their  womauliness,  that  they  would  not  care  for  their  homes, 
and  that  they  would  become  strong  minded — he  it  was  who  declared 
that  it  would  not  make  them  a  bit  different,  that  they  would  still  be 
womanly  and  kind  and  motlierly  and  sisterly.  The  result  was  that 
women  were  given  the  right  of  petition,  and  have  they  not  vindicated 
John  Quincy  Adams  ?  You  can  not  legislate  the  womanly  trait  into 
being. 

It  is  said  that  if  women  are  given  the  right  to  vote  it  will  prevent 
their  being  womanly.  I  know  it  is  a  sentiment  of  chivalry  in  some  good 
men  that  hinders  them  from  givdng  us  the  ballot.  They  think  we  should 
not  be  what  they  admire  so  much  j  they  think  we  should  be  lacking  in 
womanliness  of  character,  which  we  most  certainly  wish  to  preserve; 
but  we  believe  that  history  proves  they  have  retained  that  womanliness, 
and  if  we  can  only  make  men  believe  that,  and  if  we  can  only  make 
women  believe  that,  the  ballot  will  just  come  along  sailing  in  a  ship 
with  the  wind  beating  every  sail — the  ballot  will  come  in  the  next  ten 
years. 

I  ask  you  to  notice  here  if  the  women  who  have  been  in  this  inter- 
national council,  if  the  women  who  are  school  teachers  all  over  this 
nation,  if  the  hundreds  of  thousands  are  not  a  womanly  set  of  women. 
They  have  gone  outside  of  the  old  sphere.  We  believe  that  in  the  time 
of  peace  women  can  come  forward,  and  can,  with  peaceful  plans,  use 
weapons  that  are  grand  and  womanly,  and  that  her  thoughts,  winged 
with  hope  and  the  force  of  the  heart  given  to  them,  will  have  an  effect 
far  mightier  than  forceful  power.  For  that  reason  we  ask  you  that  that 
class  of  our  women  who,  having  a  level  head  upon  their  shoulders,  can 
be  trusted  shall  be  allowed  to  stand  at  the  ballot-box,  because  we  be- 
lieve that  at  the  ballot-box  every  person  shows  his  individuality,  and 
would  show  her  individuality.  The  majesty  or  the  meanness  of  the 
man — and  by  that  I  mean  to  include  womanhood — comes  out  more  at 
the  ballot-box  than  anywhere  else.  The  ballot  is  the  compendium  of  all 
there  is  in  civilization,  and  of  all  that  civilization  has  done  for  us.  We 
believe  that  the  mothers  who  had  the  good  sense  to  train  noble  men  like 
you  who  have  achieved  high  positions,  had  the  good  sense  to  train  your 
sisters  in  the  same  way,  and  that  it  is  a  -pitj  that  the  State  has  lost  that 
other  half  of  the  conservative  power  that  comes  from  a  Christian  rear- 
ing and  a  Christian  character. 

I  have  spoken  thus  on  the  principles  which  Lave  made  me,  a  con- 
servative woman,  devoted  to  the  idea  of  the  ballot,  and  have  made  me 
one  in  heart  with  all  these  good  and  true  suffrage  women,  though  not 
one  in  organic  community.  I  represent  before  you  the  Woman^s 
Christian  Temperance  Union  and  not  a  suffrage  society,  but  I  bring 
these  principles  to  your  sight,  and  I  ask  you,  my  brothers,  to  be  grand 
and  chivalrous  towards  us  on  this  new  departure  that  we  now  wish  to 
make. 

I  ask  you  to  remember  that  it  is  women  who  have  given  the  costliest 
hostages  to  fortune,  and  out  into  the  battle  of  life  they  have  sent  their 
best  beloved  with  snares  that  have  been  legalized  set  on  every  hand. 
From  the  arms  that  held  him  long  the  boy  has  gone  forever,  and  he  will 
not  come  back  again  to  the  home,  and  can  not  come  back  again  into  the 
world.  Then  let  the  world  in  the  person  of  its  womanhood  go  forth  and 
make  a  home,  and  make  that  home  in  the  State  and  in  society.  By  all 
the  pains  and  danger  the  mother  has  shared,  by  the  hours  of  patient 
watching  over  beds  where  little  children  tossed  in  fever  and  in  pain,  by 
the  incense  of  ten  thousand  prayers  wafted  to  God  from  earnest  lips,  I 
charge  you,  gentlemen,  give  women  power  to  go  forth  so  that  when  her 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


27 


son  undertakes  life's  treacbeious  battle  still  let  his  mother  walk  beside 
him  weak  but  serious,  and  clad  in  the  garments  of  power.  [Applause.] 

Miss  Anthony.  The  chairman  assures  me  that  the  resolution  for  the 
printing  shall  be  passed. 

The  Chairman,  ^o,  presented. 

Miss  Anthony.  Presented.  Of  course  we  know  that  whatever  the 
chairman  of  this  committee  does  present  will  be  passed.  Kow,  gentle- 
men, we  are  greatly  obliged  to  you  and  I  feel  very  proud  of  all  my 
"girls"  who  have  been  brought  up  before  you  this  morning,  and  yon 
may  consider  the  meeting  adjourned. 


S.  Rep.  1  27 


Appendix  II. 


Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Woman  Suffrage^  Onited  Stales  Senate, 

January  24,  1889. 

Thursday,  January  24,  1889. 

The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.  in  the  Seuate  reception  room,  to 
hear  arguments  in  behalf  of  woman  suffrage  from  delegates  to  the  Na- 
tional Woman  Suffrage  Association. 

Present:  Senators  Blair  (acting  chairman),  Pasco,  Palmer,  and  Chace, 
of  the  committee,  and  Senators  Chandler,  Dolph,  Farwell,  and  Stewart. 

Senator  Blair  (acting  chairman).  Ladies,  the  hearing  is  to  be,  as 
you  all  understand  of  course,  upon  the  joint  resolution  (S.  R.  11)  pro- 
posing an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  extend 
iug  the  right  of  suffrage  to  women,  which  has  been  introduced  in  the 
Senate  and  referred  to  this  committee,  and  is  as  follows : 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Bepresentatives  of  the  United  States  of  America  in 
Congress  assembled  {two-thirds  of  each  House  concurring  therein),  That  the  following 
article  be  proposed  to  the  legislatures  of  the  several  States  as  an  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States;  which,  when  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  said 
legislatures,  shall  be  valid  as  part  of  said  Constitution,  namely : 

Article  — . 

Section  1.  The  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied  or 
abridged  by  the  United  States  or  by  any  State  on  account  of  sex. 

Sec.  2.  The  Congress  shall  have  power,  by  appropriate  legislation,  to  enforce  the 
provisions  of  this  article. 

The  chairman  of  the  committee,  Senator  Cockrell,  is  absent  by  reason 
of  the  death  of  liis  colleague,  Mr.  Burnes,  a  member  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, and  Senator  Vest,  who  was  requested  to  attend,  has  sent 
a  note  excusing  his  absence  by  reason  of  the  death  of  his  colleague. 


REMARKS  BY  MRS.  ISABELLA  BEECHER  HOOKER. 

Miss  Anthony.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  wiU  introduce  to  you 
first  Mrs.  Isabella  Beecher  Hooker,  of  Connecticut,  who  has  a  thought 
which  she  wants  to  present  before  the  committee. 

Mrs.  Hooker.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  Miss  Anthony  says  that 
1  have  a  thought  to  present  to  you.  I  have  two  thoughts,  and  the  first 
is  this  :  The  women  of  this  country  have  been  deprived  of  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury  simply  because  they  have  no  vote.  This  was  exemplified 
in  the  case  of  Miss  Anthony  in  1873,  when  Judge  Ward  Hunt,  of  the 
sui^reme  bench,  took  the  case  from  the  jury,  allowed  them  no  cousulta- 

29 


30 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


tion  in  their  seats  or  out  of  tbem,  and  directed  the  clerk  to  enter  up  a 
verdict  of  guilty.  And  when  the  counsel  for  the  defendant  interposed, 
the  judge  closed  the  discussion  by  sayiug, Take  the  verdict,  Mr.  Clerk," 
and  the  clerk  then  said : 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  hearken  to  your  verdict  as  the  court  has  recorded  it.  You 
say  you  tind  the  defendant  guilty  of  the  olfense  wlicreof  she  stands  indicted,  and  so 
say  you  all. 

To  this  the  jury  made  no  response,  ahd  were  immediately  dismissed. 

Our  claim  is  that  if  a  man  had  been  on  trial  instead  of  a  woman,  Judge 
Hunt  would  not  have  dared  thus  to  violate  all  rules  of  law.  Do  you 
ask  why  ?  1  answer,  simply  because  a  man  who  votes  has  a  political 
party  behind  him  whose  interest  it  is  to  protect  him  in  his  right  to 
vote,  and  had  the  meanest  man  in  this  country  been  denied  his  right  to 
a  verdict  from  the  jury,  the  party  i)ress  of  the  country  would  have  rung 
the  changes  on  such  an  infamous  proceeding  till  the  unjust  judge  would 
have  been  compelled  to  reverse  his  own  decision.  But  more  than  this, 
we  claim  that  he  never  would  have  even  thought  of  making  such  a  decis- 
ion except  as  against  a  disfranchised  class  of  citizens. 

I  would  it  were  my  right  or  privilege  to  ask  the  members  of  this  com- 
mittee how  many  of  them  know  that  Judge  Hunt  did  thus  actually  take 
the  case  from  the  jury.  I  have  found  very  few  gentlemen  in  Congress, 
on  the  bench,  or  at  the  bar  who  believe  that  this  my  statement  is  abso- 
lutely true;  therefore  I  have  rehearsed  the  story  in  this  pamphlet, 
which  I  now  lay  before  the  committee  in  the  hope  that  it  may  be  printed 
as  a  part  of  my  argument. 

Do  you  ask  why  we  have  so  long  been  silent  on  this  matter,  I  an- 
swer, because  as  a  disfranchised  class  we  have  no  power  to  influence 
public  opinion.  "The  Supreme  ('ourt  has  decided  against  your  right 
to  vote"  was  the  cry  all  over  the  land,  and  it  would  have  been  suicidal 
to  attempt  to  characterize  a1  that  time  this  verdict  of  a  judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court  as  an  infamous  one.  But  now  Judge  Hunt  has  gone  to 
render  his  own  account  before  a  tribunal  that  knows  no  iiartiality,  and 
I  believe,  friends,  if  he  could  stand  here  to-day  in  my  place  he  would 
plead  guilty  before  you  and  ask  to  reverse  his  own  decision,  that  his 
soul  might  be  at  rest;  and  I  feel  sure  it  never  will  be  at  rest  until  he 
does  reverse  it  somehow  or  somewhere. 

My  second  thought  is  this :  That  whereas  in  the  great  centennial  of 
1876  women  were  denied  all  participation  in  the  public  proceedings 
that  commemorated  the  birth  of  the  Declarationof  Independence,  though 
they  earnestly  and  respectfully  sought  to  declare  their  sentiments  of 
loyalty  to  the  great  principles  of  liberty  and  responsibility  there  pro- 
claimed, and  their  fealty  to  the  Constitution  framed  thereupon,  they 
now  should  demand  official  recognition  by  C'ongress  and  the  State  leg- 
islatures and  should  be  put  upon  every  board  of  commissioners  which, 
at  the  public  expense,  are  to  initiate  and  carry  out  the  august  ceremonials 
of  the  coming  centennials  of  1889  and  1892,  to  the  end  that  taxation 
without  representation  shall  no  longer  be  acknowledged  as  a  just  and 
constitutional  policy  in  this  Government  nominally  by  the  people.  Anh 
we  ask  you,  gentlemen  of  the  committee,  to  bring  this  matter  to  the 
consideration  of  the  Senate,  that  in  all  future  public  occasions,  that 
august  body  may  take  the  lead  in  recognizing  the  women  of  the  country 
as  faithful  citizens,  worthy  to  be  entrusted  equally  with  men,  with  the 
responsibilities  growing  out  of  our  national  constitution  and  our  repub- 
lican form  of  government. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


31 


THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  RIGHTS  OP  THE  WOMEN  OF  THE  UNITED 

STATES. 

(  An  address  before  the  International  Cotincil  of  Women,  "Washington,  D.  C,  March  30,  1888.  By 

Isabella  Beecher  Hooker.] 

In  tlie  month  of  August,  1774,  that  eminent  statesman  and  true  patriot,  Thomas 
Jefferson,  in  a  little  tract  entitled  "xi  Summary  View  of  thoRightsof  British  America," 
used  certain  words  which  I  will  take  for  my  text  while  addressing  you  to-day  on  the 
"  Constitutional  Rights  of  the  Women  Citizens  of  the  United  States."  They  are 
these : 

' '  The  whole  art  of  Government  consists  in  the  art  of  being  honest." 
And  again : 

The  God  who  gave  us  life  gave  us  liberty  at  the  same  time  ;  the  hand  of  force  may 
destroy,  but  can  not  disjoin  them." 

May  i  ask  your  patient  attention  while  I  attempt  to  show  :  First,  that  under  a 
proper  interpretation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which  he  had  so  largo 
a  part  in  preparing,  women  have  a  right  to  vote  to-day,  on  precisely  the  same  terms 
with  men  ;  and  secondly,  that  they  ought,  for  various  reasons,  to  exercise  this  right 
without  subjection  to'molestation  or  delay,  and  men  ought  to  help  them  to  do  so  by 
every  means  in  their  power. 

First  let  mo  speak  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  assert  that  there 
is  not  a  lino  in  it,  nor  a  word,  forbidding  women  to  vote ;  but  properly  interpreted, 
that  is,  interpreted  by  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  by  the  assertions  of  the 
Fathers,  it  actually  guaranties  to  women  the  right  to  vote  in  all  elections,  both 
State  and  National.  Listen  to  the  preamble  to  the  Constitution,  and  the  preamble, 
you  know,  is  the  key  to  what  follows  ;  it  is  the  concrete,  general  statement  of  the 
great  principles  which  subsequent  articles  express  in  detail.    The  preamble  says  : 

We,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a  more  i)erfect  union,  es- 
tablish justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote 
the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  pos- 
terity, do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America." 

Commit  this  to  memory,  friends  ;  learn  it  by  heart  as  well  as  by  head,  and  I  should 
have  no  need  to  argue  the  question  before  you  of  my  right  to  vote.  For  women  are 
''people"  surely,  and  desire  as  much  as  men,  to  say  the  least,  to  establish  justice  and 
to  insure  domestic  tranquillity ;  and,  brothers,  you  will  never  insure  domestio  tran- 
quillity in  the  days  to  come  unless  you  allow  women  to  vote,  who  pay  taxes  and 
bear  equally  with  yourselves  all  the  burdens  of  society ;  for  they  do  not  mean 
any  longer  to  submit  patiently  and  quietly  to  such  injustice,  and  the  sooner  men  un- 
derstand this  and  graciously  submit  to  become  the  political  equals  of  their  moth- 
ers, wives,  and  daughters — ay,  of  their  grandmothers,  for  that  is  my  category,  in- 
stead of  their  political  masters,  as  they  now  are,  the  sooner  will  this  precious  domes- 
tic tranquillity  be  insured.  Women  are  surely  "  people,"  I  said,  and  were  when  these 
words  were  written,  and  were  as  anxious  as  men  to  establish  justice  and  promote  the 
general  welfare,  and  no  one  will  have  the  hardihood  to  dfeny  that  our  foremothers 
(have  we  not  talked  about  our  forefathers  alone  long  enough?)  did  their  full  share  in 
the  work  of  establishing  justice,  providing  for  the  common  defense,  and  promoting 
the  general  welfare  in  all  those  early  days. 

The  truth  is,  friends,  that  when  liberties  had  to  be  gained  by  the  sword  and  pro- 
tected by  the  sword,  men  necessarily  came  to  the  front  and  seemed  to  be  the  only 
creators  and  defenders  of  these  liberties;  hence  all  the  way  down  women  have  been 
content  to  do  their  patriotic  work  silently  and  through  men,  who  are  the  fighters  by 
nature  rather  than  themselves,  until  the  present  day;  but  now  at  last,  when  it  is  es- 
tablished that  ballots  instead  of  bullets  are  to  rule  the  world,  and  we  in  this  country 
are  making  and  upholding  our  just  laws  by  ballots  alone,  keeping  our  bullets  for  the 
few  wretched  Indians  on  the  frontiers,  whom  we  are  wicked  enough  to  wish  to  ex- 
terminate rather  than  to  civilize  and  educate,  now,  it  is  high  time  that  women 
ceased  to  attempt  to  establish  justice,  and  promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure 
the  blessings  of  liberty  to  themselves  and  their  posterity,  through  the  votes  of  men, 
because  they  can  not  control  these  votes  and  turn  them  to  high  moral  uses  in  gov- 
ernment; on  the  contrary,  our  brothers,  the  best  of  them,  are  at  their  wit's  end  to- 
day, and  so  appalled  at  the  moral  corrux)tions  of  the  body-politic  that  they  are  ready, 
some  of  them,  to  throw  away  their  own  power  to  vote  and  go  back  upon^the  whole 
theory  of  our  Government  of  the  many,  of  the  people  (our  Government  nominally  of 
the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  people),  and  to  ask  for  the  government  of  the 
few  once  more,  the  few  rich,  the  few  wise,  the  few  educated. 

But  I  shall  deal  with  this  point  hereafter.  I  only  wish  to  fasten  upon  your  minds 
now  this  thought,  that  women  are  included  in  this  word  ''people"  of  the  preamble, 
and  were  intended  to  be  included  as  much  as  men,  and  that  their  non-use  of  the 


32 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


ballot  .in  all  the  past,  because  they  chose  to  exercise  tlieir  people's  powers  ii.  other 
"waj's,  has  not  cnt  them  off  from  their  right  to  use  the  ballot  at  any  time  they  may 
sec  lit;  and  yon  will  perceive  by  a  careful  examination  of  the  whole  Constitution 
which  follows  tlie  preamble,  and  which  became  the  law  of  the  land  so  early  as  1789, 
that  women  were  embraced  in  its  provisions  precisely  as  men  were,  and  that  the  word 
"people,"  so  frequently  used,  always  included  them. 

This  is  true  of  the  four  articles  which  I  will  consider,  and  of  every  other  article  in 
the  Constitution  where  the  word  "people"  is  used.  Article  1  of  the  amendments  is: 
"The  right  of  the  people  to  peaceably  assemble  and  petition  for  a  redress  of  griev- 
ances," etc.  No  one  doubts  that  women  have  that  right  equally  with  men ;  in  fact, 
this  is  about  the  only  political  right  that  is  cheerfully  accorded  to  us  to-day,  because 
it  is  so  easy  to  get  rid  of  us  and  silence  us  in  that  way. 

For  years  and  years  women  have  been  petitioning  Congress  and  the  State  legis- 
latures to  take  down  the  i)olitical  bars  which  men  have  put  up,  contrary  to  the 
National  Constitution  and  the  whole  spirit  of  our  Government,  and  allow  them  to 
become  active  coworkers  in  promoting  the  general  welfare ;  but  the  reply  has  been 
"leave  to  withdraw,"  or  its  equivalent ;  and  this  simply  because  these  women  pe- 
titioners had  no  power  to  cut  off  the  Heads  of  these  Congressmen  and  assemblymen 
(their  political  heads,  I  mean,  because  we  do  not  believe  much  in  bloodshed  of  any 
sort).  So  long  ago  as  1871 1  got  an  order  from  a  Senator  to  the  Clerk  of  the  Senate  for 
a  search  for  petitions  then  on  file  in  his  office,  and  here  is  the  Clerk's  report.  He  found 
the  names  of  20,000  women  slumbering  in  the  dusty  pigeon-holes  of  his  office,  and  the 
honorable  gentleman  who  asked  me,  witli  a  smile  of  contempt,  "How  many  women 
really  want  to  vote  ?  "  was  surprised  at  the  record,  which  was  not  a  tenth  part  of  the 
number  who  had  been  wearily  petitioning  our  legislative  bodies  year  after  year  since 
1848. 

And  then  there  is  article  2,  with  its  provision  for  "  the  right  of  the  people  to  keep 
and  to  bear  arms,"  etc.,  which  right  women  assuredly  have  equally  with  men,  and 
which,  unless  some  new  protective  element  is  brought  into  society,  women  will  be 
compelled  to  use  in  self-defense  as  never  before,  for  the  crimes  against  woman  in  her 
very  womanhood  are  becoming  unendurably  frequent  all  over  our  land.  The  new 
protective  element,  I  hardly  need  say,  is  the  ballot  in  her  own  hands,  since  it  is 
already  in  the  hands  of  these  ruffians  who  make  night  hideous,  and  who  virtually 
close  the  thoroughfares  of  our  cities  and  villages  even  to  all  honest  women  the  mo- 
ment the  sun  has  gone  down.  Have  you  ever  thought  of  it,  gentlemen  ?  you  who  are 
opposed  to  woman's  use  of  the  ballot,  that  among  her  so-called  protectors,  who  are  to 
use  her  ballot  for  her,  are  these  very  men  for  whom  we  build  most  of  our  jails  and 
penitentiaries,  taxing  the  women  to  do  it,  and  that  every  election  day  sees  paupers 
and  vagrants  taken  from  the  work-house  to  elect  the  men  who  are  to  make  and  ad- 
minister the  laws  for  all  women,  no  less  than  all  men? 

Article  4  provides  for  "the  right  of  the  people  to  be  secure  against  unreasonable 
searches  aind  seizures,"  etc.  Women  surely  need  to  be  and  are  thus  secured.  And 
article  9  provides  that  the  "enumeration  in  the  Constitution  of  certain  rights  shall 
not  be  construed  to  deny  others  retained  by  the  people." 

Is  it  not  perfectly  clear  that  all  these  are  the  rights  of  women  equally  with  men, 
and  that  the  term  "people"  as  here  used  was  intended  to  embrace  both? 

Thus,  then,  the  preamble  and  the  Constitution  under  which  our  Government  was 
formed  and  began  its  w^ork  of  protective  legislation,  plainly  embraced  women  in  all 
its  provisions;  and  when  the  preamble  declares  that  the  object  of  all  was  to  secure 
the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  it  surely  did  not  mean  to  se- 
cure to  men  alone  and  their  posterity  these  blessings  of  liberty,  to  the  half  of  our- 
selves and  the  half  of  our  posterity,  but  to  the  whole  people,  women  as  well  as  men. 

And  note,  again,  the  word  "  secure"  in  this  preamble,  which  is  scarcely  less  im- 
portant than  the  word  "people."  "  Secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and 
our  posterity" — not  give  the  blessings  of  liberty  ;  as  though  the  framers  of  the  Con- 
stitution were  autocrats,  with  power  to  bestow  or  withhold  liberties,  but  secure  the 
blessings  of  liberty  to  those  who  already  had  the  right  to  them  from  God  and  by 
their  own  free  nature,  and  who  were  comiug  together  for  purposes  of  defense  and 
security  as  against  an  outside  world  that  still  insisted  that  liberty  was  not  the  right 
of  the  many  but  of  the  few,  and  who  might  be  able  to  overthrow  this  right  of  indi- 
viduals to  life,  liberty,  and  the  j>ursuit  of  happiness,  unless  they  combine  together  to 
defend  and  secure  these  rights. 

And  this  is  where  the  Declaration  of  Independence  comes  in  as  an  interpreter  of 
the  Constitution,  and  it  utters  no  uncertain  voice  on  this  question  as  to  who  are  the 
"  people"  meant  in  the  preamble  and  articles  following.  It  says :  "  We  hold  these 
truths  to  be  self-evident" — (mark  that,  self-evident;  that  is,  that  they  require  no 
proof) — "that  all  men  arc  created  equal;  that  they  are  endowed  by  tlicir  Creator 
with  certain  inalienable  rights ;  that  amoug  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit 
of  happiness;  that  to  secure  these  rights" — (here  again  is  the  word  "secure,"  not 
give,  grant,  or  b'jstow) — "governments  are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their 


WOMAN  SUFFEAGE. 


33 


just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed"  (not  from  the  consent  of  halt'  the 
governed — the  consent  of  the  male  half — but  the  governed),  and  that  ''whenever 
any  form  of  government  becomes  destructive  of  these  ends  it  is  the  right  of  the 
people  to  alter  or  abolish  it,  and  institute  a  new  government,  laying  its  foundation 
on  such  principles  and  organizing  its  powers  in  such  form  as  to  them  shall  3eem  most 
likely  to  elfect  their  safety  and  happiness." 

This  is  to  say,  the  fathers  in  Congress  assembled  in  Philadelphia  on  the  4th  of  July, 
1776,  proclaimed  over  the  whole  earth  that  governments  derive  their  just  powers 
from  the  consent  of  the  governed,  and  that  taxation  without  representation  is  tyr- 
anny ;  and  for  the  support  of  this  declaration,  with  a  firm  reliance  on  the  protection 
of  divine  Providence,  they  mutually  pledged  to  each  other  their  lives,  their  fortunes, 
aud  their  sacred  honor ;  and  yet  we  are  told  to-day  that  the  women  of  these  States 
have  no  right  to  vote  until  the  men,  who  alone  have  been  in  the  habit  of  voting,  shall 
make  some  new  aud  special  laws  to  meet  their  case ;  iu  other  words,  till  men  shall 
grant  women  a  right  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  a.  right  to  promote 
the  general  welfare,  a  right  to  establish  justice,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to 
themselves  and  their  posterity.  Now,  friends,  do  you  wonder  that  it  makes  my  blood 
boil  to  hear  such  words  as  these ;  to  hear  from  the  lips  of  mere  boys  the  assertion  that 
they  and  their  sex  alone  have  the  right  to  make  and  execute  the  laws  that  I  and  my 
daughters  are  to  live  under ;  that  they  are  born  to  rule  and  I  born  to  obey  ;  that  be- 
cause I  and  other  women  have  blindly  thought  aud  loved  to  think  in  all  the  past 
that  law-making  aud  law-executing  were  safe  in  the  hands  of  our  brothers  and 
fathers  and  husbands,  they  being  the  accredited  protectors  of  women,  we  are  to  leave 
men  now  aud  forever  to  the  use  of  this  power,  when  we  have  reluctantly  opened  our 
eyes  to  the  truth  that  it  is  not  good  for  mau  to  be  alone  in  the  state  any  more  than 
iu  the  family,  in  the  church,  and  in  social  life;  that  the  state  needs  mothers  as  well 
as  fathers,  and  that  moral  corruption  will  not  only  continue  to  prevail,  but  with  an 
advancing  civilization  will  be  steadily  on  the  increase,  so  long  as  woman  is  powerless 
to  put  down  moral  evils  by  the  direct  use  of  political  power  as  well  as  by  moral  influ- 
ence ? 

You  tell  me  that  I  must  submit  to  conditions  before  I  can  vote  ;  I,  who  am  a  free- 
born  citizen  of  the  United  States;  while  yet  you  admit  this  ignorant  foreigner,  if  he 
is  a  man,  to  the  full  privileges  and  responsibilities  of  citizenship.  I  defy  this  assump- 
tion of  power  on  the  part  of  the  men  of  this  country.  I  declare  to  you  as  did  the 
Apostle  Paul:  I  am  free-born."  "  With  a  great  price  obtained  I  this  freedom,"  said 
the  Roman  centurion  to  thispatriotric  old  apostle  ;  but  he  replied :  "  I  am  free-born." 

Ah,  friends,  there  is  music  iu  these  words  to  my  ear.  They  are  the  deep  vibrations 
of  a  soul  that  loves  its  country  as  itself,  and  there  are  tens  of  thousands  of  women 
to-day  that  are  ready  to  pledge  their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  their  sacred  honor  to 
the  maintenance  of  their  rights  as  free-born  citizens  of  this  Republic,  and  who  will 
never  willingly  consent  to  such  desecration  of  coustitutious.  State  or  National,  as 
would  be  caused  by  the  addition  of  special  articles  providing  for  the  right  ^f  women 
to  vote.  Such  articles  would  virtually  read  thus:  "  All  men  are  created  equal ;  all 
women  are  also  created  equal  not  only  to  each  other  but  to  men ;  all  men  may  peace- 
ably assemble  and  petition  for  redress  of  grievances,  may  keep  and  bear  arms,  may 
be  secure  against  unreasonable  searches  and  seizures,  may  retain  to  themselves  all 
rights  not  enumerated  in  the  Constitution,  and  all  women  may  assemble,  etc." 

As  well  may  theologians  interpret  "Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do 
unto  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them,"  to  mean  literally  men,  and  therefore  demand  a 
new  scripture  specially  to  include  women  in  these  and  the  like  injunctions:  *'He 
that  believeth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  condemned,"  "  No 
man  can  serve  two  masters,"  "A  good  man  out  of  tbe  good  treasure  of  his  heart 
bringeth  forth  good  things,"  etc.  No,  friends,  the  truth  is,  precedent  and  prejudice, 
custom  aud  blind  conservatism,  are  the  only  barriers  against  women  in  government 
to-day.  Constitutions  are  all  right  when  properly  interpreted  and  shorn  of  their 
man-made  inconsistencies,  and  the  laws  are  right  save  the  voting  laws.  Every  other 
law  recognizes  woman  by  the  use  of  the  masculine  pronoun,  and  compels  her  to  pay 
taxes,  to  be  fined,  imprisoned,  and  hung  as  he,  his,  and  him,  and  it  is  simply  absurd 
and  wicked  to  tax  aud  hang  a  woman  by  one  statute  and  deny  her  right  to  vote  by 
another,  when  the  phraseology  is  precisely  the  same  iu  both. 

And  now,  as  to  the  one  article  of  the  National  Constitution  which,  it  is  claimed, 
forbids  women  to  vote.  Will  you  follow  me  patiently  while  I  attempt  to  show  that  this 
article  really  in  fact  guaranties  to  women  the  right  to  vote  for  members  of  Congress 
rather  than'forbids  it,  and  not  only  so,  but  it  virtually  calls  upon  the  General  Gov- 
ernment to  interfere  with  the  State  governments  if  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting women  in  the  exercise  of  this  right.    That  article  reads  thus  : 

"Art.  1,  Sec.  2.  The  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  chosen  every  second  year  by 
the  people  of  the  several  States,  and  the  electors  of  each  State  shall  have  the  qualifi- 
cations requisite  for  eh  ctorsoi  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the  State  legislature." 

S.  Rep.  2543  3 


34 


WOMAIs  SUFFRAGE. 


Here  you  have  it  in  full.  The  ouly  paragraph  in  the  United  States  Constitution 
th;it  can  be  tortured  to  exclude  women  from  voting  for  United  States  officers,  and  this 
is  the  way  it  is  tortured  by  onr  adversaries.  I  speak  advisedly  when  I  say  adversa- 
ries;" for  friends,  it  is  no  pleasant  task,  this  work  of  going  up  and  down  the  length 
and  breadth  of  the  land  proclaiming  that  women  are  free,  aud  ought  to  use  their  free- 
dom under  a  sense  of  responsihility,  and  by  the  couscientious  use  of  the  ballot,  the 
only  token  of  political  responsibility;  aud  the  men  who  keep  up  these  laws  of  preccr 
dent  and  prejudice  aud  shut  us  from  the  peaceful  and  womanly  expression  of  our 
opinion  aud  our  will  in  matters  of  Government  are  therefore  the  worst  kind  of  adver- 
saries. They  compel  us  to  most  unwelcome  duty,  and  to  penalties  of  whose  sting 
they  have  but  little  conception.  Some  of  us  know  in  our  hearts  to-day  of  tire  and 
fagot,  whose  burning  makes  deeper  scars  than  the  martyr  fires  of  old,  and  were  it  not 
for  faith  in  God  aud  love  to  man  we  should  have  given  up  the  contest  long  ago. 

Hero,  then,  you  have,  I  say,  the  ouly  argument  against  the  right  of  women  to  vote 
contained  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  briefly  stated  it  is  this :  The 
latter  clause  says  that  electors  for  members  of  Congress  must  have  the  same  qualifi- 
cations as  electors  for  members  of  the  State  legislature,  and  the  constitution  of  Con- 
necticut, for  instance,  declares  in  article  6,  section  2,  that — 

Every  white  male  citizen  of  the  United  States,  who  shall  have  attained  the  age 
of  tweuty-oue  years  and  resided  in  this  State  one  year  and  in  the  town  six  mouths, 
and  shall  be  able  to  read  any  article  of  the  constitution,  shall,  on  his  taking  such 
oath  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  be  an  elector  of  the  State." 

Now,  say  objectors,  women  are  not  white  male  citizens  of  the  United  States,  aud  as 
these  are  the  only  ones  that  may  choose  members  of  the  legislature,  these  are  the  only 
ones  who  may  choose  members  of  Congress.  To  which  I  reply  :  First,  that  by  the  four- 
teenth ameudment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  the  word  Avhite"  was 
expressly,  aud  the  word  "male"  virtually,  blotted  out  from  our  State  constitutions ; 
aud  in  Connecticut  black  men  under  that  amendment  were  allowed  to  vote  for  years 
before  the  word  white"  was  expunged  from  its  constitution  ;  and,  second,  that  the 
first  clause  of  this  article  2,  section  2,  which  says  that  the  House  of  Representatives 
shall  be  composed  of  members  chosen  by  the  people,  denies  to  every  State  the  right 
to  make  any  qualification  for  State  electors  that  shall  interfere  with  the  predomi- 
nating right  of  the  whole  people  to  elect  their  members  of  Congress. 

It  is  as  if  the  United  States  Constitution  had  said  the  right  of  trial  by  jury  shall 
bo  secured  to  all  the  people  of  the  United  States,"  and  Connecticut  had  said  in  her 
constitution  "every  white  male  citizen  shall  be  entitled  to  a  trial  by  jury."  Plainly 
such  an  article  of  a  State  constitution  would  be  pronounced  null  and  void,  and  the 
only  reason  the  other  has  not  been  so  pronounced  long  ago  is  that  in  the  beginning 
men  alone  thought  of  voting,  wished  to  vote,  did  vote,  and  so  the  authors  of  the 
State  coustitutiou,  in  defining  who  should  be  electors,  naturally,  and  as  a  matter 
of  exactness,  and  without  any  thought  of  women,  said  "all  white  male  citizens," 
with  such  and  such  qualifications,  may  vote;  and  the  case  is  all  the  stronger  for 
women  than  for  black  men,  because  the  enslavement  and  disfranchisement  of  black 
men  was  contemplated,  reluctantly  it  is  true,  but  nevertheless  contemplated  and 
recognized  by  the  National  Constitution,  while  the  disfranchisement  of  women  was 
not  thought  of  or  seriously  considered  for  a  moment. 

This  is  so  plainly  true  that  women  did  actually  vote  in  a  few  instances  in  the  earlier 
days,  and  they  only  ceased  to  do  so  because  they  did  not  appreciate  its  importance, 
or,  as  in  New  Jersey,  because  that  State,  in  direct  violation  of  the  Coustitutiou  of  the 
United  States,  as  I  think,  specially  disfrauchised  the  women  of  the  State. 

And  to  those  who  may  not  be  ready  to  admit  that  the  National  Constitution  secures 
to  women  the  right  to  vote  in  all  cases  equally  with  men,  there  is  this  special  and  de- 
cisive argument  with  regard  to  their  right  to  vote  for  members  of  Congress.  The 
Constitution,  as  we  have  seen,  gives  the  right  to  the  people  of  the  State  with  only 
this  limitation — that  the  electors  for  members  of  Congress  shall  have  the  qualifica- 
tions requisite  for  electors  for  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the  State  legislature. 
The  right  is  absolute,  except  that  the  State  may  fix  the  "qualifications." 

Now  what  is  a  qualificatiou  ?    Sex  is  not  one.    A  qualification  is  something  that 
may  be  acquired,  as  a  certain  age,  a  certain  time  of  residence,  ability  to  read,  etc... 
A  certaiu  height  of  stature  could  not  be,  a  certain  color  of  the  eyes  could  notW', 
Nothing  natural  and  uuchangeable  could  be.    So  sex  can  not  be.    The  State,  therefore 
in  making  sex  a  disqualification,  has  attempted  that  which  it  had  no  power  to  do^  - 
and  its  action  is  so  far  void. 

If  then,  as  is  claimed,  the  United  States  may  step  in  aud  jjunish  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States  for  voting  illegally  for  members  of  Congress,  as  in  the  case  of  Susan 
B.  Anthony,  because  the  State  had  limited  the  voting  jirivilege  to  male  citizens,  surely 
the  United  States  may  much  more  be  called  upon  to  step  in  and  protect  the  right  of 
all  the  people  of  every  State  to  become  electors  for  members  of  Congress,  including 
the  women  people  as  well  as  the  men  people.  Do  you  not  see  it,  friends  f  "Members 
of  the  House  of  Reiiieseutatives  shall  be  chosen  by  the  people  of  the  several  States," 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


35 


and  yet  when  one  of  these  people,  being  an  honest,  law-abiding,  tax-paying  woman, 
after  consulting  the  best  lawyer  in  her  city  and  being  duly  registered  and  sworn  in  as 
an  elector,  puts  her  ballot  in  the  box  for  a  member  of  Congress,  the  United  States 
Government  by  marshal  and  commissioners  seizes  her,  and  by  a  judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  condemns  her  to  a  fine  and  costs  of  prosecution,  on  the 
ground  that  the  State  of  New  York  has  a  right  to  disfranchise  half  its  citizens,  they 
being  guilty  only  of  being  women,  and  in  the  face  of  the  express  provision  of  this 
article  that  the  people  of  every  State  shall  elect  the  members  of  Congress  of  that 
State.  And  I  may  as  well  finish  what  I  have  to  say  of  Miss  Anthony's  trial  just  here, 
because  Judge  Hunt's  decision  against  her  was  based  partly  on  this  very  article,  and 
it  is  time  that  his  interpretation  of  it  and  the  consequences  thereof  were  fully  made 
known  to  all  the  people  of  this  land. 

Judge  Hunt  decided  that  the  right  of  voting  is  a  right  or  privilege  arising  under 
the  constitution  of  the  State,  and  not  of  the  United  States,  and  this  in  the  face  of  the 
fourteenth  and  fifteenth  amendments,  recently  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the 
States,  and  thereby  made  as  much  the  law  of  the  land  as  any  other  part  of  the  United 
States  Constitution.    These  amendments  read  thus : 

''Fourteenth.  All  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States  and  subject  to 
the  jurisdiction  thereof,  are  citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the  State  wherein 
they  reside.  No  State  shall  make  or  enforce  any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  priv- 
ileges or  immunities  of  citizens  of  the  United  States,  nor  shall  any  State  deprive  any 
person  of  life,  liberty  or  property  without  due  process  of  law,  nor  deny  to  any  person 
within  its  jurisdiction  the  equal  protection  of  the  law.  " 

This  amendment  was  supposed  to  cover  the  whole  ground  of  enfranchising  the 
black  men  made  free  by  the  thirteenth  amendment,  and  it  ought  to  have  been  suffi- 
cient. 

But  the  white  men  of  the  South  were  naturally  averse  to  seeing  black  men,  just  out 
of  slavery,  the  chief  rulers  of  their  States,  they  being  recently  disfranchised  them- 
selves for  rebellion,  and  they  made  it  so  difficult  for  black  men  to  vote  that  the  Ee- 
publican  party,  who  were  absolutely  dependent  upon  their  votes  for  continuance  in 
power,  determined  to  strengthen  the  right  of  black  men  to  vole  by  another  amend- 
ment, and  so  they  passed  the  fifteenth  amendment,  which  reads  thus : 

"The  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied  or  abridged 
by  the  United  States  or  by  any  State  on  account  of  race,  color,  or  previous  condition 
of  servitude.  Congress  shall  have  power  to  enforce  this  act  by  appropriate  legisla- 
tion. " 

And  notice  here,  that  while  these  specified  grounds  of  denial  are  forbidden,  this 
fifteenth  amendment  does  not  by  implication  authorize  a  denial  on  other  grounds. 
If  it  did,  a  majority  in  a  State  might  at  any  time  disfranchise  a  minority.  In  a  State 
like  Massachusetts,  where  the  women  are  in  a  large  majority,  they  might,  if  allowed 
to  vote  (we  will  merely  imagine  the  absurdity;,  amend  the  State  constitution,  and 
exclude  all  men  from  the  franchise.  Yet  no  one  would  for  a  moment  claim  that  this 
action  would  be  valid.  It  would  be  held  by  every  court  in  the  land  that  the  men  had, 
under  the  National  Constitution,  a  right  to  vote  that  could  not  be  taken  away.  And, 
by  the  way,  a  question  is  often  made  as  to  what  this  right  to  vote  shall  be  called — 
whether  a  natural  right  or  mere  privilege.  I  do  not  care  for  names.  But  if  the  men 
of  Massachusetts  were  thus  debarred  from  voting,  and  were  struggling  to  recover 
the  franchise,  their  right  to  it  would  be  precisely  w^hat  that  of  women  is  to-day.  I 
do  not  care  what  you  call  it.    I  am  satisfied  to  call  it  a  fundamental  right. 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  declaring  in  the  four- 
teenth amendment  that  all  persons  born  in  the  United  States  and  subject  to  the  ju- 
risdiction thereof  are  citizens,  not  only  of  the  United  States,  but  of  the  State  wherein 
they  reside;  and  in  the  fifteenth  recognizing  the  right  of  citizens  to  vote;  and  yet  a 
judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  declares  from  the  bench  that  the 
citizen's  right  to  vote  comes  from  the  State  alone,  and  thus  that  a  State  may  dis- 
franchise any  of  its  citizens  except  black  men,  these  alone  being  protected  from  dis- 
franchisement by  the  latter  clause  of  the  fifteenth  amendment — "on  account  of  race, 
color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude."  Thus  you  perceive  that,  as  I  have  just 
suggested,  a  majority  of  the  present  voters  in  any  State  may,  under  this  view,  dis- 
franchise every  other  voter  who  has  gray  hair  or  bine  eyes,  or  any  physical  i^eculiar- 
ity  but  a  black  skin ;  may  disfranchise  all  men  over  forty  years  of  age,  or  all  men  worth 
less  than  $50,000,  or  all  men  of  the  temperance  party,  or  the  labor  party,  or  the  Re- 
publican or  Democratic  parties;  in  short,  every  one  but  themselves,  the  then  major- 
ity of  voters;  and  Judge  Hunt  accepted  this  conclusion  and  declared  that  this  is  the 
constitutional  law  of  the  United  States  as  interpreted  by  him  in  his  capacity  of 
judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

He  did  this  because  he  was  so  imbued  with  the  theory  of  State  rights  as  against  na- 
tional rights,  and  so  filled  with  prejudice  against  the  rights  of  women  in  govern- 
ment that  he  was  determined  to  interpret  these  amendments  in  behalf  of  black  men 
alone,  although  the  wording  of  them  leaves  no  room  for  question  that  they  embrace 


36 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


all  the  people  of  tlie  United  States  according  to  the  meaning  and  intent  of  that  word  j 
"  people"  in  all  the  previous  articles  of  the  National  Constitution.  | 
And  yet  this  is  but  half,  and  the  least  criminal  half,  of  his  unjust  decision  in  the|i 
case  of  Miss  Anthony.    Not  content  with  misinterpreting  the  law  of  the  United  i 
States  by  proclaiming  that  the  right  to  vote  of  every  citizen  but  black  citizens  was 
subject  to  loss  at  the  pleasure  of  a  bare  majority  of  voters,  he  denied  to  Miss  Anthony 
the  right  of  trial  by  jury —that  is,  ho  decided  the  case  himself,  and  caused  the  clerk  of 
the  court  to  record  the  verdict  of  guilty  without  reference  to  the  jury,  who  were  impan- 
eled for  the  case,  who  had  been  sitting  all  through  the  trial  to  hear  the  case,  and  who 
alone  were  legally  competent  to  bring  in  a  verdict  u^^on  it.    And  when  Miss  Anthony's 
counsel  asked  leave  to  address  the  jury  he  was  denied  ;  and  when  he  asked  that  the 
jury  be  polled— that  is,  that  each  member  might  be  asked  by  name  if  this  was  his 
verdict,  he  was  again  denied,  and  Judge  Hunt  then  instructed  the  clerk  to  take  the 
verdict,  and  the  clerk  said,  in  the  usual  form  :     Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  hearken  to 
the  verdict  as  the  court  hath  recorded  it.    You  say  you  find  the  defendant  guilty  of 
the  offense  charged.    So  say  you  all."  | 

No  response  was  made  by  the  jury,  either  by  word  or  sign.  They  had  not  consulted 
together  in  their  seat  or  otherwise.  Neither  of  them  had  spoken  a  word.  Nor  had 
they  been  asked  whether  they  had  or  had  not  agreed  upon  a  verdict.  No  juror  spoke 
a  word  during  the  trial  from  the  time  they  were  impaneled  to  the  time  of  the  dis- 
charge, and  so  soon  as  the  judge  refused  to  poll  the  jury  he  said,  ''Gentlemen  of  the 
jury,  you  are  discharged,"  and  the  jurors  left  the  box,  and  one  of  them  declared  to  a 
bystander  that  guilty  was  not  his  verdict,  neither  was  it  the  verdict  of  the  other 
eleven.  ''Could  I  have  spoken,"  said  he,  "I  should  have  answered  not  guilty,  and 
men  in  that  jury  box  would  have  sustained  me."  It  seems,  friends,  that  he  and  the 
other  jurors  had  a  right  to  speak  and  to  demand  that  the  verdict  be  submitted  to  the 
jury  in  some  way.  But  they  did  not  understand  their  rights  in  this  respect,  and  were 
naturally  in  awe  of  a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  the  judge 
must  have  known  that  they  would  be  thus  awed,  or  he  would  not  have  dared  thus 
to  transgress  the  ordinary  rules  of  law.  And  for  this  act  he  deserved  impeachment^ 
and  had  the  accused  been  a  foreign  born,  though  naturalized,  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  on  trial  for  fraudulent  voting,  which  is  a  criminal  offense,  you  know,  punish- 
able by  heavy  fine  and  imprisonment,  and  had  he  been  thus  denied  a  verdict  from  the 
jury,  the  press  would  have  rung  out  the  injustice  all  over  the  land.  And  this  simply 
because  this  man  being  an  acknowledged  voter  would  have  had  a  political  party  be- 
hind him,  whose  interest  it  was  to  protect  him  and  every  other  citizen,  whether  free-  j 
born  or  naturalized,  in  his  right  to  vote. 

Thus  you  see  how  in  this  right  to  vote  is  wrapped  up  the  great  volume  of  our 
cherished  rights.    Judge  Hunt  began  with  denying  to  women  their  citizens'  right  to  j 
vote,  and  by  an  easy  step  passed  on  to  denying  that  right  regarded  most  sacred  of 
all,  the  right  of  trial  by  jury. 

And  the  crime  of  Judge  Hunt  in  refusing  Miss  Anthony  her  right  of  trial  by  jury 
was  all  the  greater  because  there  was  no  appeal  from  his  court  to  any  higher  one,  as 
is  customary  in  all  our  other  courts.  A  circuit  court  judge  may  review  His  ow^n  de- 
cision, but  there  is  no  appeal  from  his  final  decision  in  such  a  case  as  this,  and  in  this 
case  the  judge  refused  even  to  reconsider  the  case,  though  strenuously  urged  to  do  so 
by  Judge  Selden,  Miss  Anthony's  able  counsel.  Do  you  ask  why  Judge  Hunt  was 
willing  thus  to  soil  the  purity  of  his  judicial  ermine  and  lower  the  dignity  of  the 
court  ?  I  answer,  precedent  and  prejudice  held  him  in  bonds,  as  it  does  many  other 
men  of  character  and  position,  and  he  felt  doubtless  that  he  was  rendering  his  coun- 
try a  good  service  when  he  pronounced  it  a  crime  for  a  woman  citizen  of  the  United 
States  to  vote  under  the  same  charter  with  the  men  citizens  of  the  United  States. 
And  there  are  hundreds  of  men  who  think  themselves  both  wise  and  just  who  would 
have  been  glad  of  his  opportunity  to  do  the  same  thing  and  thus  crush  out  this 
h(iresy  of  woman's  right  to  help  to  make  and  execute  the  laws  she  is  to  live  under. 
But,  friends,  you  remember  that  "  truth  crushed  to  earth  shall  rise  again  ;  "  and  this 
truth  of  the  political  equality  of  woman  ha?j  risen  already  from  its  judicial  grave  and 
in  white  raiment  is  marching  on,  like  John  Brown's  soul,  conquering  and  to  conquer. 
And  the  day  is  not  far  distant  when  this  decision  of  Judge  Ward  Hunt  will  be  over- 
ruled and  trodden  under  foot,  and  he  himself  will  be  compelled  to  submit  at  last  to  a 
verdict,  just  but  humiliating,  a  verdict  recorded  on  high  in  the  book  of  everlasting 
judgments.* 

And  now  permit  me  to  give  you  briefly  the  argument  of  woman's  right  to  vote  in 
our  State  elections  as  well  as  national,  in  consequence  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 

*  The  atrocity  of  Judge  Hunt's  course  in  Miss  Anthony's  case  so  strikingly  illus- 
trated the  almost  universal  rule  that  in  striking  down  ore  just  right  other  important 
ones  are  trampled  down  with  it,  that  I  have  thought  it  best  to  insert  in  the  appendix 
a  critical  review  of  the  matter,  jirepared  at  the  time  by  my  husband,  Mr.  John  Hooker, 
and  published  in  Miss  Anthony's  history  of  her  trial. 


WOMAN  SUFFEAGE. 


37 


amendments  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  It  is  simply  this:  Before  the 
war,  and  reconstruction  acts  following  it,  the  word  ''citizen"  was  not  fully  defined, 
some  jurists  contending  that  all  persons  owing  allegiance  to  the  Government  and  pro- 
tected by  it  were  properly  citizens,  and  others,  that  only  those  who  were  accredited 
legal  voters  could  properly  be  called  citizens.  Then,  when  the  Republican  party  de- 
sired to  enfranchise  the  black  men,  partly  for  the  sake  of  securing 'their  votes  (I  do 
not  say  that  this  was  the  sole  moLivo)  in  the  next  Presidental  election,  it  was  not 
willing  to  deface  the  national  Constitution  by  such  words  as  those,  "All  black  men, 
formerly  slaves,  are  citizens  of  the  United  States,"  and  "No  State  shall  make  or  en- 
force any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  or  immunities  of  black  men;"  and 
again,  **The  right  of  black  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied 
or  abridged  by  any  State,"  and  therefore  it  was  driven  to  the  annunciation  of  a 
general  principle  of  citizenship,  applicable  to  all  persons  at  all  times,  and  this  was 
the  principle  that  "all  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States  and  subject 
to  the  jurisdiction  thereof  are  citizens  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  wherein 
they  reside."  This  a  grand  assertion,  a  true  one,  and  one  in  harmony,  as  I  have  already 
shown,  with  the  spirit  and  letter  of  the  whole  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and,  like  them,  it  embraced  all  women  as  well  as 
all  men,  and  secured  to  all  women  no  less  than  all  men  their  right  to  vote. 

Now,  friends,  mark  these  words :  "  Secure  "  and  "  righ  t  to  vote."  Our  claim  is  that 
the  original  Constitution  gave  no  right  to  vote  to  any  man  or  woman,  but  it  simply 
secured  to  every  man  and  woman  his  or  her  original  natural  right  to  govern  himself 
or  herself,  except  so  far  as  he  or  she  delegates  this  to  others  for  purposes  of  social 
order.  And  these  amendments,  following  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  in  preamble 
and  articles,  declare  that  all  persons  are  citizens,  and  reco;j;nize  the  citizen's  right  to 
vote.  Can  anything  be  plainer,  then,  than  that  a  woman,  being  a  '*  person,"  is  a  citi- 
zen, and  being  a  "citizen,"  has  the  citizen's  right  to  vote? 

It  was  under  this  conviction  that  she  had  a  plain  right  to  vote,  and  therefore  a  plain 
duty  to  vote,  that  Miss  Anthony  determined  to  cast  her  vote  for  President  and  mem- 
bers of  Congress  at  a  certain  election.  And  she  succeeded  in  convincing  the  regis- 
trars of  her  ward  and  the  inspectors  of  elections  that  she  had  this  right,  insomuch 
that  they  registered  her  name,  and  the  oath  of  the  elector  was  administered  and  her 
ballot  was  received  and  counted,  and  then  the  United  States  came  down  upon  her  as 
a  criminal,  and  prosecuted  her  for  illegal  voting  under  a  law  of  Congress  passed  in 
1870  on  purpose  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  amend- 
ments. 

Please  notice  now  that  formerly  each  State  had  charge  of  its  own  elections  and  the 
United  States  had  no  right  to  interfere  with  the  elections  in  any  State,  even  though 
the  election  was  for  national  officers,  but  in  the  eagerness  of  the  Republican  party  to 
enforce  the  amendments  which  would  bring  black  votes  to  their  aid,  they  gave  a  new 
power  to  Congress  in  this  section,  "Congress  shall  have  the  power  to  enforce  this 
article,"  viz,  "the  right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  without  denial  on 
account  of  race,  color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude."  And  Congress  passed 
what  is  called  the  enforconient  act  of  1870,  which  is  entitled  "An  act  to  enforce  the 
right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  in  the  several  States  of  the  Union." 
General  terms  again  here,  you  perceive  ;  not  an  act  to  enforce  the  right  of  black  men 
to  vote  in  the  several  States  of  the  Union,  but  of  all  citizens  of  the  United  States. 
And  the  first  eighteen  clauses  of  the  act  are  very  minute  in  their  provisions  for  the 
protection  of  these  black  men  whose  votes  wore  wanted;  and  then  there  was  a  nine- 
teenth clause,  that  was  intended  solely  to  hinder  white  rebel  men  from  voting,  who 
had  been  disfranchised  during  the  war,  and  this  clause  reads  thus:  "If  at  any  elec- 
tion for  Representatives  or  Delegates  to  Congress  of  the  United  States  any  person  shall 
vote  without  having  a  lawful  right  to  vote,  every  such  person  shall  be  deemed  guilty 
of  a  crime,  and  shall  for  such  crime  bo  liable  to  prosecution  in  any  court  of  the  United 
States  of  competent  jurisdiction,  and  on  conviction  thoreof  shall  be  punished  by  a 
fine  not  exceeding  $500,  or  by  a  terra  of  imprisonment  not  exceeding  three  years,  or 
both,  in  the  discretion  of  the  court,  and  shall  pay  the  costs  of  prosecution." 

And  under  this  clause  of  the  enforcement  act  of  1870,  which  was  made  expressly 
to  punish  white  male  rebel  citizens  for  voting  after  they  had  been  disfranchised  for 
rebellion,  Judge  Hunt  condemned  Susan  B.  Anthony  for  the  crime  of  voting  "  with- 
out having  a  lawful  right  to  vote."  This  woman,  the  blackest  of  Black  Republicans, 
who  had,  with  others  like  herself,  furnivslied  Mr.  Sumner  with  half  his  ammunition, 
in  the  shape  of  petitions  from  thousands  and  thousands  of  citizens  in  behalf  of  the 
black  man — names  which  it  was  an  enormous  task  to  collect,  but  without  which  all 
appeals  to  Congress  to  do  justice  would  have  been  in  vain  ;  this  woman,  who  had  vio- 
lated the  infamous  fugitive  slave  law  every  time  by  giving  the  cup  of  cold  water  to 
the  panting  fugitive  and  speeding  him  on  his  way  to  free  soil  in  Canada — she,  thank 
God,  of  all  women  in  this  land,  was  selected  by  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  to  be  prosecuted,  dragged  from  one  court  to  another,  harassed  during  the 
space  of  nearly  a  year,  tried  at  last  in  another  city,  and  fined  for  the  crime  of  vot- 


38 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


ing  for  President  of  the  United  States  and  members  of  Congress,  under  an  act  en- 
titled "An  act  to  enforce  the  riglit  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  in  the 
several  States  of  this  Union,"  and  under  a  clause  of  that  act  that  made  it  a  crime  for 
a  rebel  to  vote,  because  he  had  been  deprived  of  his  citizen's  right  to  vote  by  special 
act  of  Congress  in  consequence  of  his  crime  of  rebellion. 

And,  friends,  do  you  not  know  that  no  citizen  can  be  lawfully  disfranchised  either 
by  State  or  nation  except  for  crime  or  rebellion,  and  then  only  by  the  judgment  of 
his  peers  *  But  in  this  case  of  Miss  Anthony,  she  was  punished,  not  only  as  if  she  had 
beeu  guilty  of  crime  or  rebellion,  or  both,  but  she  was,  so  far  as  the  unjust  judgment 
of  the  court  could  do  it,  disfranchised  for  evermore,  and  that  without  the  judgment 
of  her  peers,  in  a  double  sense;  for  she  was  not  only  denied  the  verdict  of  the  male 
jury  sitting  there  on  purpose  to  render  their  verdict,  but  a  jury  of  her  peers  she  could 
uot  have,  nor  can  any  woman,  so  long  as  women  are  denied  the  right  to  vote  and  to 
sit  upon  a  jury.  And,  in  the  case  of  Miss  Anthony's  jury,  had  they  been  allowed  to 
render  a  verdict,  it  would  have  beeu  a  verdict  not  of  her  peers,  but  of  her  political 
superiors,  and  this  would  have  been  true  of  them  however  ignorant  or  uneducated 
they  were  ;  whether  black  men  or  white,  drunk  or  sober,  every  man  of  them  was  her 
sovereign,  with  power  uot  only  to  make  but  to  administer  the  laws  under  which  she 
is  compelled  to  live. 

And  herein  is  the  degradation  of  woman  to-day,  not  only  that  she  can  not  have  a 
voice  in  making  the  laws  and  choosing  officers  to  execute  the  laws,  but  she  is  com- 
pelled to  be  taxed,  fined,  imprisoned,  hung  even,  by  the  verdict  always  of  her  politi- 
cal superiors,  her  male  sovereigns,  every  one  of  whom  is  considered  competent  to 
legislate  for  her  and  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  her  by  court  and  jury  now  and  for 
evermore.  Do  you  wonder  that  Miss  Anthony  declared  to  Judge  Hunt  that  she 
should  never  pay  this  fine,  or  that  he,  apparently  cowed  by  this  modern  John  Ham- 
den,  blandly  replied  :  "  The  court  does  not  order  you  to  stand  committed  till  the 
fine  is  paid  f"  Judge  Hunt  knew  full  well  that  Miss  Anthony  would  goto  jail  a 
thousaud  times  before  she  would  pay  this  unjust  fine.  And  he  knew  also  that  the 
spectacle  of  this  woman  in  prison  for  three  years  under  charge  of  voting  without 
having  a  lawful  right  to  vote"  would  rouse  the  nation  to  a  sense  of  woman's 
political  status  before  the  law  as  nothing  else  could  do ;  therefore  he  virtually  re- 
mitted the  tine,  and  by  so  doing  sealed  forever  his  own  condemnation. 

Do  you  ask,  why  recount  this  trial,  and  so  asperse  the  character  of  a  learned  and 
otherwise  upright  judge?  I  answer,  because  his  decision  has  become  a  precedent, 
and  on  this  account  we  have  been  compelled  to  relinquish,  temporarily  at  least,  our 
high  vantage  ground  of  constitutional  rights  and  guaranties  and  resort  to  the  ad- 
vocacy of  an  amendment  to  the  National  and  State  constitutions,  measures  alike  dis- 
honoring to  the  constitutions  and  to  the  womanhood  of  the  country.* 

We  believe,  with  Senator  Hawley,  from  my  own  State,  whom  I  have  been  proud 
to  claim  as  a  personal  friend  for  many  years,  that  (and  I  now  give  his  own  language 
as  reported  in  the  Hartford  Couraut)  "  our  Government  involves  a  great  deal  of 
labor  for  us.  '  Liberty  is  a  burden,  not  a  release,'  a  French  philosopher  has  said.  If 
you  want  ease,  appoint  as  good  a  king  as  you  can  find,  give  him  good  counsellors,  and 
tell  them  to  save  you  all  trouble.  You  will  have  ease ;  but  if  you  desire  real  free- 
dom, it  means  labor.  The  twelve  million  sovereigns  of  this  country  [notice  here 
that  my  friend  calls  this  voting  half  of  the  people  the  '  sovereigns,'  just  as  I  have  done] 
are  bound  each  to  know  something  of  the  responsibility  that  is  constantly  taught  in 
caucus,  town  meetings,  etc.  The  caucus  should  be  only  a  meeting  of  honest  citizens 
to  see  what  had  best  be  done."  And  as  there  are  thousands  of  women  quite  ready  to 
assume  this  responsibility  of  seeing  what  had  best  be  done  in  the  primary  meetings 
of  all  the  cities  and  villages  of  our  land,  and  thousands  more  who  will  do  it  consci- 
entiously, though  reluctantly,  when  called  to  it  by  invitation  of  their  fathers, 
brothers,  husbands,  and  sons,  we  desire  most  earnestly  that  the  approaching  second 
century  of  male  legislation  should  witness  a  reversal  of  this  unjust  decision  of  Judge 
Hunt  and  proclaim  the  freedom  and  responsibility  of  all  the  citizens  of  these 
United  States.  Let  our  brothers,  then,  consecrate  this  opening  century  of  consti- 
tutional government  by  an  act  of  justice  that  shall  be  a  supreme  one,  and  that  shall 
make  our  National  Constitution  forever  a  charter  of  the  highest  human  rights. 
Aud  let  them,  in  token  of  their  willingness  to  recognize  our  equal  political  rights, 
at  least  invite  us  to  participate  with  them  by  personal  representation  in  the  cere- 
monial and  pageant  that  is  to  welcome  in  this  new  century  of  oonstitutional 
government. 

I  said  in  the  beginning  that  women  ought  to  exercise  their  constitutional  right  to 

*  The  ofiicial  report  of  Miss  Anthony's  trial  may  be  found  in  11  Blatchford  (Circuit 
Court  Reports),  200,  of  the  circuit  court  of  the  northern  district  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  and  the  subsequent  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the 
case  of  Mrs.  Virginia  L.  Minor,  of  Missouri,  for  which  Judge  Hunt's  decision  became 
the  precedent,  may  be  found  in  21  Wallace  (U.  S.  Reports),  162. 


WOJUN  SUFFRAGE. 


39 


vot»,  and  men  ought  to  help  them  to  do  so  by  every  means  in  their  power.  And  this 
for  two  reasons : 

(1)  Because  questions  of  legislation  to-day  are  largely  questions  of  morals,  and  men 
alone  are  incompetent  to  deal  with  the  morals  of  a  community,  however  wise  and  just 
they  may  be,  and  however  honest  in  their  desire  to  promote  the  general  welfare. 
Education,  secular  and  religious,  temperance,  chastity,  police  regulations,  penal  in- 
stitutions and  reformatories — who  has  more  interest  than  women  citi/ens  in  all  these 
questions,  and  more  wisdom  to  bring  to  their  solution  ? 

(2)  There  can  be  no  true  manhood  nor  true  womanhood  when  men  rule  and  women 
merely  obey.  Every  mother  in  her  home,  every  woman  teacher  in  our  schools  is  at  a 
discount  to-day  because  of  her  political  subordination.  Every  boy  knows  this,  and 
consciously  or  unconsciously  acts  accordingly,  and  true  political  economy,  which  is 
only  another  name  for  the  science  of  government,  can  never  be  taught  until  women 
are  intelligent  and  responsible  thinkers  upon  the  subject  equally  with  men,  and  are 
able  to  carry  out  their  convictions  at  the  ballot-box  as  men  do.  Hence,  I  repeat,  it 
is  the  plain  duty  of  every  woman  to  desire  to  vote,  and  of  every  man  to  remove  the 
obstacles  in  her  way. 

I  will  only  answer  one  objection.  It  is  said,  "We  have  too  many  voters  already. 
It  is  unjust,  to  be  sure,  to  exclude  all  women  on  this  account,  but  we  can  not  help  it. 
Men  will  not  consent  to  be  disfranchised,  so  wo  must  make  amends  for  our  mistake 
in  inviting  all  men  to  vote  by  forbidding  all  women."  This  is  too  much  like  Charles 
Lamb,  who,  being  reproved  for  going  so  late  to  his  desk  in-the  morning,  said  he  made 
up  for  it  by  going  home  early  in  the  afternoon. 

But  hare  we  too  many  voters?  In  other  words,  is  the  doctrine  of  God  and  the 
fathers  of  this  Republic  an  unsound  one,  that  personal  liberty  and  personal  responsi- 
bility are  the  only  foundations  of  integrity,  whether  in  the  individual  or  the  nation? 
No,  it  is  not  unsound.   It  is  just  as  true  to-day  as  it  was  at  Sinai  and  Plymouth  Rock. 

"Thou  shalt "  and  "We  will,"  reads  tbe  Decalogue  and  the  covenant  of  that  old-time 
Jewish  people  ;  and  thus  in  spirit  speak  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and 
the  Declaration  of  Independence ;  and  it  is  a  grand  and  wholesome  doctrine,  and  one 
we  can  not  afford  to  lose  sight  of  for  a  moment.  But  those  do  lose  sight  of  it  who  say 
we  have  too  many  voters  already.  No,  we  have  not  too  many.  On  the  contrary,  to 
take  away  this  ballot  even  from  the  ignorant  and  perverse  is  to  invite  discontent, 
social  disturbance,  and  crime.  The  restraints  and  benedictions  of  this  little  white 
symbol  are  so  silent  and  so  gentle,  so  atmospheric,  so  like  the  snow-flakes  that  come 
down  to  guard  the  slumbering  forces  of  the  earth  and  prepare  them  for  spriogiug  into 
bud,  blossom,  and  fruit  in  due  season,  that  few  recognize  the  divine  alchemy,  and 
many  impatient  souls  are  saying  we  are  on  the  wrong  path — the  old  world  was  right — 
the  government  of  the  few  is  safe  ;  the  wise,  the  rich  should  rule  ;  the  ignorant,  the 
poor,  should  serve.  But  God,  sitting  between  the  eternities,  has  said  otherwise,  and 
we  of  this  land  are  foreordained  to  prove  his  word  just  and  true.  And  we  will  prove  it 
by  inviting  every  new-comer  to  our  land  to  share  our  liberties  so  dearly  bought  and 
our  responsibilities  now  grown  so  heavy  that  the  shoulders  which  bear  them  are 
staggering  under  their  weight ;  that  by  the  joys  of  freedom  and  the  burdens  of  re- 
sponsibility they,  with  us,  may  grow*  into  the  stature  of  perfect  men,  and  our  country 
realize  at  last  the  dreams  of  the  great  souls  who,  "  appealing  to  the  Supreme  Judge 
of  the  world  for  the  rectitude  of  their  intentions,"  did  "ordain  and  establish  the  Con- 
stitution for  the  United  States  of  America" — the  grandest  charter  of  human  rights 
that  the  world  has  yet  conceived. 


OPINIONS  OF  LEADING  THINKERS  ON  THE  GENERAL  SUBJECT 

OF  HUMAN  RIGHTS. 

Richard  HooTcer,  1594:  "Law,  to  bind  all,  must  be  assented  to  by  all;  and  there 
can  be  no  legal  appearance  of  assent  without  some  degree  of  representation." 

Granville  Sharp,  1778:  "No  tax  can  be  levied  without  manifest  robbery  and  injus- 
tice where  legal  and  constitutional  representation  is  wanting,  because  the  English 
law  abhors  the  idea  of  taking  the  least  property  from  freemen  without  their  free 
consent." 

Lord  Somers,  about  1700:  "Amongst  all  the  rights  and  privileges  appertaining  unto 
us,  that  of  having  a  share  in  the  legislation,  and  being  governed  by  such  laws  as  we 
ourselves  shall  cause,  is  the  most  fundamental  and  essential,  as  well  as  the  most  ad- 
vantageous and  beneficial." 

Priestly,  1772:  "Political  liberty,  I  would  say,  consists  in  power  which  the  mem- 
bers of  the  State  reserve  to  themselves  of  arriving  at  the  public  offices,  or  at  least 
of  having  votes  in  the  nomination  of  those  who  fill  them." 

Herhert  Spencer:  "However  much  the  giving  of  political  power  to  women  may  dis- 
agree with  our  notions  of  propriety,  we  conclude  that,  being  required  by  that  first 


40 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


prerequisite  to  greater  liappmess,  the  law  of  equal  freedom,  sucli  a  concession  re  un 
questionably  right  and  good." 

Henry  Thomas  Buclclc  :  **  The  turn  of  thought  of  women,  their  habits  of  mind,  theii 
conversation,  insensibly  extending  over  the  whole  surface  of  society,  and  frequentl.> 
penetrating  its  intimate  structure,  have,  more  than  all  other  things  put  together 
tended  to  raise  us  from  the  dust  in  which  we  are  too  prone  to  grovel." 

Bev.  Charles  Khuisley  :  ^'  One  principal  cause  of  the  failure  of  so  many  magnificent 
schemes,  social,  jiolitical,  religious,  which  have  foUowt  d  each  other  ago  after  age. 
has  been  this,  that  in  almost  every  case  they  have  ignored  the  rights  and  the  powen 
of  one-half  of  the  human  race,  namely,  women.  I  believe  that  nothing  will  go  right, 
that  politics  will  not  go  right,  that  society  will  not  go  right,  that  religion  will  nol 
go  right,  that  nothing  human  ever  will  go  right,  except  in  so  far  as  woman  goet 
right ;  and  to  make  woman  go  right  she  must  be  put  in  her  place,  and  she  must  havf 
her  rights,  and  as  to  what  those  rights  are  I  have  very  definite  opinions,  which  I  shall 
not  give  up  for  any  arguments  which  I  seem  likely  to  meet  with  iu  this  present  gen- 
eration." 

Benjamin  FranJclin  :  *'  Every  man  of  this  commonalty,  except  infants,  insane  per- 
sons, and  criminals,  is  of  common  right  and  by  the  laws  of  God  a  freeman,  and  en- 
titled to  the  free  enjoyment  of  liberty.  They  who  have  no  voice  nor  vote  iu  the  elect- 
ing of  representatives  do  not  enjoy  liberty,  but  are  absolutely  enslaved  to  those  who 
have  votes  and  their  representatives ;  for  to  be  enslaved  is  to  have  governors  whom 
other  men  have  set  over  us,  and  be  subject  to  laws  made  by  the  representatives  ol 
others,  without  having  had  representatives  of  our  own  to  give  consent  on  our  behalf.' j 

Otis^s  Righ  ts  of  the  Colonies  :  The  very  act  of  taxing  exercised  over  those  who  are| 
not  represented  appears  to  me  to  be  depriving  them  of  one  of  their  most  essential! 
rights  as  freemen,  and  if  continued  seems  to  be,  iu  efiect,  an  entire  disfranchisement 
of  every  civil  right.  If  a  man  is  not  his  own  assessor  iu  person,  or  by  deputy,  hia 
liberty  is  gone,  or  he  is  entirely  at  the  mercjr  of  others." 

James  Madison:  Under  every  view  of  the  subject  it  seems  indispensable  that  the 
mass  of  the  citizens  should  not  be  without  a  voice  iu  making  the  laws  which  they 
are  to  obey  and  in  choosing  the  magistrates  who  are  to  administer  them." 

Abraham  Lincoln :  I  go  for  all  sharing  the  privilege  of  the  Government  who  assist 
in  bearing  its  burdens,  by  no  means  excluding  women." 

Hon.  B.  Gratz  Brown,  Missouri:  I  venture  to  affirm  that  the  purity,  the  refine- 
ment, the  instinctive  reading  of  character,  the  elegant  culture  of  the  women  of  our 
laud,  if  brought  to  bear  on  the  conduct  of  political  affairs,  would  do  much  to  elevate 
them  in  all  their  aims  and  conform  them  to  higher  standards  of  justice.  *  *  * 
The  i^articipation  of  woman  in  civil  affairs  is  neither  a  new  nor  an  uncommon  experi- 
ment." 

Hon.  George  W.  Julian,  Indiana :  "I  am  highly  gratified  with  the  late  demonstra- 
tion in  the  Senate  on  the  question  of  woman  suffrage.  Do  you  not  admire  the  speech 
of  Senator  Brown  ?  He  takes  the  ground  that  I  have  ever  done,  that  the  right  of 
suffrage  and  representation  is  a  natural  right,  and  not  a  privilege  as  many  argue, 
and  even  some  claiming  to  be  radicals." 

Senator  Anthony,  Rhode  Island :  "If  women  are  fit  to  rule  in  monarchies  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  say  why  they  are  not  qualified  to  vote  in  a  republic." 

Harriet  Beecher  Stoice:  "If  the  principle  on  which  we  founded  our  Government  is 
true,  that  taxation  must  not  be  without  representation,  a^ul  if  women  hold  property 
and  are  taxed,  it  follows  that  women  should  be  represented  in  the  state  by  their 
votes."  *  *  *  ''I  think  the  state  can  no  more  afford  to  dispense  with  the  votes 
of  women  in  its  affairs  than  the  family." 

Hon.  L.  F.  S.  Foster,  Connecticut :  "If  there  can  properly  be  taxation  without  rep- 
resentation, our  American  Revolution  was  an  unjustifiable  rebellion,  and  our  Govern- 
ment is  founded  on  fraud  and  falsehood."  (Letter  to  John  Hooker  with  regard  to  the 
right  of  tax-paying  women  to  vote  in  Connecticut.) 

Elizabetli  Stuart  Phelps  :  "If  De  Tocqueville  was  right  in  attributing  the  'singular 
prosperity  and  growing  strength  of  the  American  people  mainly  to  the  superiority  of 
their  women,'  it  is  time  that  the  commonwealth  availed  itself  more  directly  of  the 
reserve  forces  and  sources  of  such  superiority."  *  *  *  "I  earnestly  desire  to  see 
a  more  rational  basis  for  the  political  future  of  our  sex,  which  is  as  sure  to  develop 
as  the  dawn  to  follow  the  dark.  I  have  never  faltered  for  an  hour  either  in  this  wish 
or  this  assurance." 

George  William  Curtis  :  "Women  have  quite  as  much  interest  in  good  government 
as  men,  and  I  have  never  heard  or  read  of  any  satisfactory  reason  for  excluding  them 
from  the  ballot-box.  I  have  no  more  doubt  of  their  ameliorating  influence  upon 
politics  than  I  have  of  the  influence  they  exert  everywhere  else." 

Rev.  S.  J.  May,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. :  "The  true  family  is  the  type  of  the  true  state.  It  is 
the  absence  of  the  feminine  from  the  conduct  of  the  governments  o,f  the  earth  that 
makes  them  more  or  less  savage.    There  are  fathers  of  the  state,  but  no  mothers." 

Rev.  Henry  Ward  Beecher :  "We  need  the  participation  of  women  in  the  ballot- 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


41 


box.  It  is  idle  to  fear  that  sbe  will  meet  with  disrespect  or  insult  at  the  polls.  Let 
her  walk  up  firmly  and  modestly  to  deposit  her  vote,  and  all  men  will  make  way  for 
her;  and  if  any  one  ventures  to  molest  her,  the  crowd  will  swallow  him  up  as  the 
whale  swallowed  Jonah."  .       .„  , 

Bishop  Simpson :  "I  believe  that  the  great  vices  in  our  large  cities  will  never  be 
conquered  until  the  ballot  is  put  into  the  hands  of  women." 

Bev.  James  Freeman  Clarke  :  "  I  do  not  think  our  politics  will  be  what  they  ought 
till  women  are  legislators  and  voters." a 

Eev.  George  W.  Boardman,  Philadelphia:  "America's  salvation  lies  under  God  in 
America's  women.  It  is  precisely  because  I  desire  to  conserve  our  glorious  past  that 
I  plant  myself  on  the  platform  of  woman  suffrage." 

Governor  McCook,  Colorado :  "The  logic  of  a  progressive  civilization  leads  to 
women  suffrage  as  an  inevitable  result." 

Senator  Hoar,  Massachusetts  :  "  If  there  be  anything  in  politics  which  would  degrade 
women,  it  is  time  for  that  thing  to  come  to  an  end.  The  thing  we  wish  chiefly  to 
change  is  government,  and  not  woman.  If  there  be  anything  in  politics  which 
would  tend  to  degrade  or  stain  the  delicacy  of  the  purest  and  best  woman,  it  is 
something  wMch  ought  not  to  exist,  and  which  the  presence  of  woman  would  tend 
to  banish." 

POLITICAL  RIGHTS  OF  CITIZENS. 

Chief  Justice  Taney  :  "The  words  'people'  of  the  United  States  and  'citizens'  are 
synonymous  terms,  and  mean  the  same  thing;  they  both  describe  the  political  body, 
who,  according  to  onr  republican  institutions,  form  the  sovereignty,  and  who  hold 
the  power  and  conduct  the  Government  through  their  representatives.  They  are 
what  w^e  familiarly  call  the  *  sovereign  people,'  and  every  citizen  is  one  of  these  peo- 
ple and  a  constituent  member  of  this  sovereignty." 

Chief  Justice  Jay  :  "At  the  Kevolution  the  sovereignty  devolved  on  the  people,  and 
they  are  truly  the  sovereigns  of  the  country ;  but  they  are  sovereigns  without  subjects 
(unless  the  African  slaves  may  be  so  called),  and  have  none  to  govern  but  themselves. 
The  citizens  of  America  are  equal  as  fellow-citizens  and  joint  tenants  of  the  sover- 
eignty." 

Abraham  Lincoln  at  Gettyshurgh  :  "  These  died  that  the  Government  of  the  people,  by 
the  people,  for  the  people,  should  not  perish  from  the  earth." 

Webstei'' 8  Dictionary  :  "A  citizen  is  a  person,  native  or  naturalized,  who  has  the 
privilege  of  votiug  for  public  officers,  and  who  is  qualified  to  fill  offices  in  the  gift  of 
the  people." 

Bouvier^s  Law  Dictionary  :  "A  citizen  is  one  who,  under  the  Constitution  and  laws 
of  the  United  States,  has  a  right  to  vote  for  Representatives  in  Congress  and  other 
public  officers,  and  who  is  qualified  to  fill  offices  in  the  gift  of  the  people." 

Worcester's  Dictionary :  "A  citizen  is  an  inhabitant  of  a  republic  who  enjoys  the 
rights  of  a  citizen  or  freeman,  and  who  has  aright  to  vote  for  public  officers  as  a  citi- 
zen of  the  United  States. " 

The  Dutch  Publicist,  Thorbecke:  "The  right  of  citizenship  is  the  right  of  voting  in 
the  government  of  the  local,  provincial,  or  national  community  of  which  one  is  a 
member.  In  this  last  sense  the  right  of  citizenship  signifies  a  participation  in  the 
right  of  voting,  in  the  general  government,  as  member  of  the  state." 

Wheaion^s  Lnternational  Law :  "  The  possession  of  the  jus  suffragii,  at  least,  if  not 
also  of  the  jus  honorum,  is  the  principle  which  governs  at  this  day  in  defining  citizen- 
ship in  the  countries  deriving  their  jurisprudence  from  the  civil  law." 

Aristotle :  "A  citizen  is  one  who  is  a  partner  in  the  legislative  and  judicial  power, 
and  who  shares  in  the  honors  of  the  state. " 

Justice  Daniel  (  U.  S.  Supreme  Court) :  "There  is  not,  it  is  believed,  to  be  fonnd,  in 
the  theories  of  writers  on  government,  or  in  any  actual  experiment  heretofore  tried, 
an  exposition  of  the  term  citizen,  which  has  not  been  understood  as  conferring  the 
actual  possession  and  enjoyment,  or  the  perfect  right  of  acquisition  and  enjoyment, 
of  an  entire  equality  of  privileges,  civil  and  political." 

Thomas  Paine:  "The  right  of  Voting  for  representatives  is  the  primary  right  by 
which  other  rights  are  protected.  To  take  away  this  right  is  to  reduce  man  to  a  state 
of  slavery,  for  slavery  consists  in  being  subject  to  the  will  of  another." 

Justice  McKay  (supreme  court  of  Georgia) :  "It  is  the  settled  and  uniform  sense  of 
the  word  "citizen,"  when  used  in  reference  to  the  citizens  of  the  separate  States  of 
the  United  States  and  to  their  rights  as  such  citizens,  that  it  describes  a  person  en- 
titled to  every  right,  legal  and  political,  enjoyed  by  any  person  in  that  State,  unless 
there  be  some  express  exceptions  made  by  positive  law  covering  the  particular  per- 
sons whose  rights  are  in  question." 

Judge  fVashington  ( U.  S.  circuit  court) :  "  The  inquiry  is,  what  are  the  privileges  and 
immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several  States?  They  must  all  be  comprehended  under 
the  following  general  heads."  [H' re  follows  a  statement  of  numerous  rights,  civil 
and  political,  closing  as  follows:]    "To  which  is  to  be  added  the  elective  franchise, 


42  WOMAN  SUFFRAGE.  | 

as  re^;iilated  and  estaldislied  l)v  tLe  laws  or  constitutiou  of  the  State  in  which  it  i- 
exercised."    (Corfield  v.  Coryeli,  4  Wash.  C.  C.  K.,  360.) 

Supreme  court  of  Kentucky :  "No  oue  can,  therefore,  in  the  correct  sense  of  the  term 
be  a  citizen  of  a  State  who  is  not  entitled,  upon  the  terms  prescribed  by  the  institu- 
tions of  the  State,  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  conferred  by  these  institutions  upon 
the  highest  class  of  society." 

Constitution  of  the  United  States,  fourteenth  amendment:  "All  persons  born  or  nat- 
uralized in  the  United  States,  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof,  are  citizens  ol 
the  United  States  and  of  the  State  wherein  they  reside.  No  State  shall  make  or  en- 
force any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  or  immunities  of  citizens  of  the 
United  States." 

REMARKS  OF  MRS.  HOOKER 

[Before  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  at  "Washington,  in  Jannary,  1871, 
in  reply  to  a  suggestion  of  the  comuiittee  as  to  the  propriety  of  a  greater  restriction  rather  tbau 
enlargement  of  the  right  of  suflfiage  ] 

We  are  told  by  men  themselves  that  there  are  too  many  voters  already ;  restriction 
is  what  we  want,  not  enlargement  of  the  suffrage.  Let  us  see  how  this  is,  my  friends  ; 
let  us  reason  together  on  this  point  for  a  few  moments.  The  one  great  propelling 
power  of  this  Government  that  moves  the  great  political  engine,  aud  that  keeps  us 
alive  as  a  nation  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  is  God's  own  doctrine  of  personal  liberty 
and  personal  responsibility.  That  is  all  we  have  to  go  upon.  It  is,  in  fact,  fuel 
and  steam.  Liberty  is  the  steam,  responsibility  puts  on  the  breaks,  and  then  what 
is  the  safety-valve,  I  ask  you  1  Is  it  not  our  election  day  ?  Look  at  it  in  this  way. 
Every  honest  lawyer  will  tell  you  that  the  next  best  thing  to  settling  a  quarrel  be- 
tween two  belligerents  is  to  bring  the  parties  into  court,  because  the  court-room  is  a 
great  cooling-otf  place,  a  perfect  refrigerator.  A  man  who  has  quarreled  with  hig 
neighbor  comes  into  court,  and  before  the  lawyers  get  through  with  him  he  wishee 
he  hadn't  quarreled.  How  is  it  that  our  courts  act  in  this  way  T  What  do  we  gain 
in  this  ?  Everything.  In  old  times  a  dispute  between  man  and  man  was  settled  by 
blows — fisticuffs — gradually  superseded  by  the  sword ;  and  now  we  have  thrown  that 
out  and  established  a  system  of  jurisprudence.  Now  all  these  petty  grievances  must 
be  settled  in  court.  Private  violence  must  no  longer  be  permitted,  and  that  is  a  great 
march  in  civilization. 

Now  the  parallel  case  is  this :  We  in  this  country — we  men,  I  mean,  for  women  are 
nobodies  and  no^vhere  when  you  come  to  the  discussion  of  great  questions  like  these 
but  I  use  the  conventional  we — "  we"  in  this  country  are  attempting  to  carry  our 
ideas  of  liberty  and  responsibility  into  legislation  ;  and  we  don't  agree — we  quarrel 
bitterly  and  almost  come  to  blows  again  ;  but  election  days  cool  us  off,  acting  like  a 
court-room  itself  upon  us.  We  accept  their  judgment,  and  go  about  our  business 
quietly  till  next  time.  Now  if  we  were  all  Americans,  acting  under  an  intelligent 
sense  of  responsibility,  everything  might  be  expected  to  run  smoothly  under  this 
regime  ;  but  the  trouble  is  when  the  foreigner  comes  in  who  does  not  understand  oui 
institutions,  who  is,  perhaps,  ignorant,  debased,  and  superstitious.  But  the  foreigner 
is,  it  seems  to  me,  the  very  man  who  needs  this  safety-valve  of  the  election  day. 
We  ourselves  could  run  our  own  nationality  ;  but  here  comes  this  man  from  the  prio 
cipalities  and  kingdoms  of  the  old  world, — and  he  has  an  idea  that  he  is  going  to  be 
richer,  smarter,  happier — more  on  an  equality  with  every  other  man  than  ever  he 
was  before.  He  comes  here,  and  what  does  he  find  ?  He  finds  a  ladder,  reaching 
higher  into  the  clouds,  perhaps,  but  the  lower  rounds  are  just  as  near  the  earth  as 
over  there,  and  he  is  on  the  lowest  round  still.  He  sees  his  next-door  neighbor  has 
more  money  than  he  has,  is  better  educated,  and  commands  the  respect  of  the  com- 
munity, as  he  does  not,  and  he  is  filled  with  disappointment,  and  sometimes  with 
rage.  What  would  he  naturally  do,  with  his  old  world  antecedents  and  training 
when  he  is  thus  aggrieved,  as  he  conceives  himself  to  be  ?  Why,  burn  your  barn — 
break  into  your  house — steal  all  he  can  from  yoji.  But  what  does  election  day  do 
for  him  ?  On  that  day  he  is  as  good  as  anybody.  He  goes  to  the  polls  side  by  side 
with  the  first  man  in  the  land,  aud  he  rides  in  a  carriage  there — rf  he  is  too  drunk  to 
walk — and  he  can  vote  the  first  man  in  the  line  if  he  chooses.  The  richest  man  in 
the  country  must  walk  behind  him  and  wait  for  his  turn.  He  drops  his  ballot  aud  he 
is  cooled  off.  He  soon  begins  to  get  hold  a  little  of  this  idea  of  responsibility  that  I  am 
speaking  of,  and  after  a  while  it  will  come  into  his  head — very  slowly,  perhaps,  for 
we  are  all  slow  to  learn  these  things — that  he  has  got  to  work  himself  up  and  get  on 
a  par  with  these  intelligent  and  influential  people  who  are  so  powerful  in  making 
laws  and  customs. 

Now,  friends,  it  seems  to  me  if  you  could  disfranchise  every  foreigner  to-day  who  is 
not  intelligent,  or  if  you  could  make  intelligence  the  test  of  voting,  you  would  have 
ten  barns  burned  where  you  have  one  now.  I  believe  it  firmly.  Being  naturally 
conservative,  as  I  think  all  women  are,  a  few  years  ago  I  really  thought  that  ten, 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


43 


even  .twenty  years'  residence  miglit  be  required  of  foreigners  before  they  should  be 
allowed  to  vote.  I  said  they  did  not  know  enough,  and  so  ought  to  be  kept  out  as 
long  as  that.  To-day,  after  years  of  careful  observation,  and  of  study  of  the  question, 
I  would  not  require  a  day  more  than  the  brief  term  fixed  by  our  present  statutes.  If 
disfranchisement  meant  the  annihilation  of  the  trouble  I  might  be  glad  to  get  rid  of 
this  troublesome  question  in  that  way ;  the  task  of  running  this  country  would  then 
be  a  far  easier  one  than  it  is ;  but  it  does  not  mean  annihilation.  So  when  gentlemen 
talk  with  me,  and  say  we  have  too  many  voters  already,  I  reply,  do  not  disfranchise 
these  men,  enlighten  them,  for  God  has  sent  them  here  for  a  purpose  of  His  own. 
And  I  say  to  you  to-night,  that  the  ballot  in  the  hands  of  every  man  is  the  only  thing 
that  saves  us  from  anarchy  to-day,  that  keeps  us  alive  as  a  republic,  the  ballot  in  the 
hands  of  these  ignorant  men.  and  the  more  ignorant  they  are  the  more  they  need  it, 
and  the  more  we  need  they  should  have  it.  And  let  me  say  in  passino^,  that  recon- 
struction in  the  South  is  hindered  to-day  for  the  same  reason ;  responsibility  is  taken 
away  from  a  large  class  of  citizens.  A  disfranchised  class  is  always  a  restless  class  ; 
a  class  that,  if  it  be  not  as  a  whole  given  up  to  deeds  of  violence,  will  at  least  wink 
at  them,  when  committed  by  men  either  in  or  out  of  its  own  ranks.  "What  the  South 
needs  to-day  is  ballots,  not  bullets. 

I  leave  out  of  the  question  the  ultimate  educating  power  of  the  ballot,  though  I 
would  like  to  make  you  an  argument  upon  that  alone.  But  I  say  give  the  poor  men, 
ignorant  men,  the  ballot,  for  purposes  of  self-defense,  and  because  we  could  not  live 
in  safety  in  our  homes  otherwise.  New  York  is  poorly  governed,  we  say,  to-day,  and 
getting  to  be  a  pretty  dangerous  place  to  live  in.  But  what  would  it  bo  if  every 
foreigner  and  every  ignorant  man  could  not  go  out  on  election  day  and  prove  that 
he  is  as  good  as  anybody  ?  That  is  human  nature,  and  it  is  human  nature,  and  plenty 
of  it,  too,  that  we  have'to  deal  with. 

And  now,  my  friends,  let  me  ask  you,  what  are  these  men  sent  here  for,  and  who 
sent  them  ?  We  have  got  all  Europe,  and  all  Asia  is  coming  ;  and  who  sends  them  ? 
When  God  put  into  that  good  ship  Mayflower  those  two  great  ribs  of  oak,  personal  liberty 
and  personal  responsibility,  He  knew  the  precious  freight  she  was  to  bear,  and  ail 
the  hopes  bound  up  in  her,  and  He  x)ledged  himself  by  both  the  great  eternities,  the 
past  and  the  future,  that  that  ship  should  weather  all  storms  and  come  safe  to  port 
with  all  she  had  on  board.  And  what  God  has  promised  He  will  perform.  So  I  beg  of 
70U  not  to  think  for  a  moment  of  limiting  manhood  suffrage.  You  cut  your  own 
throats  the  day  you  do  it. 

I    And  if  men  can  not  live  in  this  country  in  safe  homes  except  their  neighbor  men 
ire  enfranchised,  can  they  live  without  enfranchised  women  any  more?    If  you  can 
\  iot  live  in  safety  with  irresponsible  men  in  your  midst,  how  can  you  live  with  irre- 
I  >ponsible  women  ?   Much  more,  how  can  you  grow  into  the  stature  of  perfect  men  in 
Christ  Jesus,  our  Lord  I    How  can  you  become  perfect  legislators,  except  your  mothers 
'  ire  instructed  on  these  great  subjects  you  are  called  to  legislate  upon,  that  they  may 
I  nstruct  you  in  their  turn?    You  do  not  know  anything  so  well  as  what  your  mothers 
lave  taught  you ;  but  they  have  not  taught  you  political  economy.    It  is  not  their 
ault  that  they  have  not,  nor  yours,  perhaps.    No  man  or  woman  studies  a  subject 
)rofoundly,  except  he  or  she  is  called  upon  to  act  upon  it.    What  business  man  studies 
I  business  foreign  to  his  own  ?    What  woman  studies  a  business  foreign  to  her  own  ? 
[  'n  past  ages  this  woman,  in  the  providence  of  God,  we  will  say,  has  been  shut  out 
rom  political  action,  for,  so  long  as  the  sword  ruled  and  man  had  to  get  his  liberty 
^  )y  the  sword,  so  long  woman  had  all  she  could  do  to  guard  the  home,  for  that  was  her 
^  )art  of  the  work — and  she  did  it  bravely  and  well,  you  will  say.    But  now  men  are 
»  lot  fighting  for  their  liberty  with  the  gun  by  the  door  and  the  Indians  outside.  You 
ire  fighting  for  it  in  halls  of  legislation,  with  the  spirit  of  truth,  with  spiritual 
,  veapons,  and  woman  would  be  disloyal  to  her  womanhood  if  she  did  not  ask  to  share 
hese  heavy  responsibilities  with  you.    And  she  has  really  been  training  herself  all 
,  hese  years  she  has  seemed  so  indifferent ;  she  has  neglected  her  duty  in  part — I  con- 
^  ess  it  freely.    It  is  not  your  fault  alone,  gentlemen,  that  we  are  not  with  you  to-day. 
r  f  we  had  been  as  aware  of  our  duty  and  privilege  years  ago  as  we  are  to-day,  if  we 
^  lad  known  our  birthright,  we  should  have  stood  by  your  side,  welcome  coadjutors, 
,  ;>Dg  since.    So  we  will  take  the  blame  of  the  past  alike ;  we  have  all  been  walking 
^  ory  slowly  this  path  of  Christian  civilization.    But  in  the  greatest  conflict  of  modern 
.  j  imes  you  announced  great  principles  and  fought  for  them  on  the  field,  and  we  stood 
I  -y  thena  in  the  home,  and  we  stand  by  them  still  there.    And  when  we  come  to  delib- 
rate  with  you  in  solemn  council  as  to  how  these  principles  shall  be  carried  into  legis- 
I  ition,  your  task  will  be  easier,  our  opportunity  will  be  larger,  and  still  our  hearts 
rill  be  where  they  have  ever  been,  in  our  homes. 

S.  Rep,  I— 


44 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


JUDGE  HUNT  AND  THE  RIGHT  OF  TRIAL  BY  JURY. 

By  John  Hooker,  Hartford,  Conn. 


Ill  the  recent  trial  of  Susan  B.  Anthony  for  voting  (illegally,  as  was  claimed,  on  the 
gromul  that  as  a  woman  she  had  no  right  to  vote— a  point  which  we  do  not  propose 
to  consider,  though  we  have  a  very  positive  opinion  in  favor  of  her  right),  the  course 
of  Judge  Hunt,  in  taking  the  case  from  the  jury  and  ordering  a  verdict  of  guilty  to 
entered  up,  was  so  remarkable,  so  contrary  to  all  rules  of  law,  and  so  subrersive 
of  the  system  of  jury  trials  iu  criminal  cases,  that  it  should  not  be  allowed  to  pass 
without  an  emphatic  protest  on  the  part  of  every  public  journal  that  values  our  liber- 
ties. 

Let  us,  first  of  all,  see  precisely  what  were  the  facts.  Miss  Anthony  was  charged 
with  having  knowingly  voted,  without  lawful  right  to  vote,  at  the  Congressional 
election  ill  the  Eighth  ward  of  the  city  of  Rochester,  m  the  State  of  New  York,  iu  No- 
vember, 1872.  The  act  of  Congress  under  which  the  prosecution  was  brought  pro- 
vides that,  "  If,  at  any  election  for  Representative  or  Delegate  in  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  any  person  shall  knowingly  personate  and  vote,  or  attempt  to  rote,  in 
the  name  of  any  othe"r  person,  whether  living,dead,orfictitious,or  vote  more  than  once 
at  the  same  election  for  any  candidate  for  the  same  office,  or  vote  at  a  place  where  the 
may  not  be  lawfully  entitled  to  vote,  or  vote  without  having  a  lawful  right  to  vote, 
every  such  person  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  crime,"  etc. 

The  trial  took  place  at  Canandaigua,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  in  the  circuit  court 
of  the  United  States,  before  Judge  Hunt,  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

The  defendant  pleaded  not  guiltj' — thus  putting  the  Government  upon  the  proof 
of  their  entire  case,  admitting,  however,  that  she  was  a  woman,  but  admitting  uoth 
ing  more. 

The  only  evidence  that  she  voted  at  all,  and  that,  if  at  all,  she  voted  for  a  Repre 
sentative  in  Congress,  offered  on  the  part  of  the  Government,  was  that  she  handed 
four  bits  of  paper,  folded  in  the  form  of  ballots,  to  the  inspectors,  to  be  placed  in 
the  voting  boxes.  There  was  nothing  on  the  outside  of  these  papers  to  indicate 
what  they  were,  and  the  contents  were  not  known  to  the  witnesses  nor  to  the  in 
specters. "  There  were  six  ballot-boxes  and  each  elector  had  the  right  to  cast  six 
ballots. 

This  evidence  would  undoubtedly  warrant  the  conclusion  that  Miss  Anthony  voted 
for  a  Congressional  representative,  the  fact  probably  appearing,  although  thepaperi 
before  the  writer  do  not  show  it,  that  one  of  the  supposed  ballots  was  placed  by  hei 
direction  in  the  box  for  votes  for  members  of  Congress.  The  facts  are  thus  minutelj 
stated,  not  at  all  for  the  purpose  of  questioning  their  sufficiency,  but  to  show  hov\ 
entirely  it  was  a  (question  of  fact,  and  therefore  a  question  for  the  jury. 

Upon  this  evidence  Judge  Hunt  directed  the  clerk  to  enter  a  verdict  of  guilty 
The  counsel  for  the  defendant  interposed,  but  without  effect,  the  judge  closing  th< 
discussion  by  saying,  "  Take  the  verdict,  Mr.  Clerk."  The  clerk  then  said, ''Gen 
tleiuen  of  the  jury,  hearken  to  your  verdict,  as  the  court  has  recorded  it.  You  sa; 
you  find  the  defendant  guilty  of  the  offense  whereof  she  stands  indicted,  and  so  sa; 
you  all."   To  this  the  jury  made  no  response,  and  were  immediately  after  dismissed 

It  is  stated  in  one  of  the  public  papers,  by  a  person  present  at  the  trial,  that  imme 
diately  after  the  dismissal  of  the  jury  one  of  the  jurors  said  to  him  that  that  was  no' 
his  verdict,  nor  that  of  the  rest,  and  that  if  he  could  have  spoken  he  should  hav 
answered  "Not  guilty,"  and  that  the  other  jurors  would  have  sustained  him  in  i1 
The  writer  has  no  authority  for  this  statement  beyond  the  letter  mentioned.  Th 
juror,  of  course,  had  a  right,  when  the  verdict  was  read  by  the  clerk,  to  declare  tha 
it  was  not  his  verdict,  but  it  is  not  strange,  perhaps,  that  an  ordinary  juror,  with  n 
time  to  consider  or  consult  with  his  fellows,  and  probably  ignorant  of  his  rights  an 
in  awe  of  the  court,  should  have  failed  to  assert  himself  at  such  a  moment. 

Probably  the  assumption  by  the  judge  that  Miss  Anthony  in  fact  voted  did  h( 
no  real  injustice,  as  it  was  a  notorious  fact  that  she  did  vote,  and  claimed  the  rigl 
to  do  so.  But  all  this  made  it  no  less  an  usurpation  for  the  judge  to  take  the  ca- 
from  the  jury,  and  order  a  verdict  of  guilty  to  be  entered  up -without  consultin 
them. 

There  was,  however,  a  real  injustice  done  her  by  the  course  of  the  judge,  inasmuc 
as  the  mere  fact  of  her  voting,  and  voting  unlawfully,  was  not  enough  for  her  convi 
tion.  It  Is  a  perfectly  settled  rule  of  law  that  there  must  exist  an  intention  to  do  an  ( 
legal  act  to  make  an  act  a  crime.  It  is  of  course  not  necessary  that  a  person  perpetr;  . 
ing  a  crime  should  have  an  actual  knowledge  of  a  certain  law  which  forbids  the  act,  I  «i«8A; 
he  must  have  a  criminal  intent.  Thus,  if  one  is  charged  with  theft,  and  admits  t 
taking  of  the  property,  which  is  clearly  proved  to  have  belonged  to  another,  it  is  y 
a  good  defense  that  lie  really  believed  that  he  had  a  right  to  take  it,  or  that  he  to 
it  by  mistake.   Just  so  iu  a  case  where,  as  sometimes  occurs,  the  laws  regulating  t 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


45 


right  to  vote  in  a  State  are  of  doubtful  meaning,  and  a  voter  is  uncertain  whether  he 
has  a  right  to  vote  in  one  town  or  another,  and,  upon  taking  advice  from  good  coun- 
sel, honestly  makes  up  his  mind  that  he  has  a  right  to  vote  in  the  town  of  A.  In  this 
belief  he  applies  to  the  registrars  of  that  town,  who,  upon  the  statement  of  the  facts, 
are  of  the  opinion  that  he  has  a  right  to  vote  there,  and  place  his  name  upon  the  list, 
and  on  election  day  he  votes  there  without  objection.  Xow,  if  he  should  be  prose- 
cuted for  illegal  voting,  it  would  not  be  enough  that  he  acknowledged  the  fact  of 
voting,  and  that  the  judge  was  of  the  opinion  that  his  view  of  the  law  wns  wrong. 
There  would  remain  another  and  most  vital  question  in  the  case,  and  that  is,  did  he 
intend  to  vote  uulawfully  J 

Now,  precisely  the  wrong  that  would  be  done  to  the  voter  in  the  case  we  are  sup- 
posing, by  the  judge  ordering  a  verdict  of  guilty  to  be  entered  up,  was  done  by  that 
course  in  Miss  Anthony's  case.  She  thoroughly  believed  that  she  had  a  right  to  vote. 
In  addition  to  this  she  had  consulted  one  of  the  ablest  lawyers  in  western  New  York, 
who  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  she  had  a  right  to  vote,  and  who  te^tiiied  on  the  trial 
that  he  had  given  her  that  advice.  The  act  of  Congress  upon  which  the  prosecution 
was  founded  uses  the  term  "  knowingly," — ''shall  knowingly  vote  or  attempt  to  vote 
in  the  name  of  any  other  person,  or  more  than  once  at  the  same  election  for  any 
candidate  for  the  same  ofiSce,  or  vote  at  a  place  where  he  may  not  be  lawfully  enti- 
tled to  vote,  or  without  having  a  lawful  right  to  vote."  Here  most  manifestly  the 
term  "  knowingly"  does  not  apply  to  the  mere  act  of  voting.  It  is  hardly  possible 
that  a  man  should  vote  and  not  know  the  fact  that  he  is  voting.  The  statute  will 
bear  no  possible  construction  but*that  which  makes  the  term  "  knowingly"  apply  to 
the  illegality  of  the  act.  Thus,  "shall  knowingly  vote  without  having  a  lawful 
right  to  vote,"  can  only  mean,  shall  vote  knowing  that  there  is  no  lawful  right  to 
vote.  This  being  so,  there  was  manifestly  a  most  vital  question  beyond  that  of  the 
fact  of  voting,  and  of  the  conclusion  of  the  judge  that  the  voting  was  illegal,  namely, 
did  Miss  Anthony  vote  knowing  that  she  had  no  right  to  vote  ? 

Now,  many  people  will  say  that  Miss  Anthony  ought  to  have  known  that  she 
had  no  right  to  vote,  and  will  perhaps  regard  it  as  an  audacious  attempt,  for  mere 
effect,  to  assert  a  right  that  she  might  think  she  ought  to  have,  but  could  not  really 
have  believed  that  she  had.  But  whatever  degree  of  credit  her  claim  to  have  acted 
honestly  in  the  matter  is  entitled  to,  whether  to  much,  or  little,  or  none,  it  was 
entirely  a  question  for  the  jury,  and  they  alone  could  pass  upon  it.  The  judge  had 
no  right  even  to  express  an  opinion  on  the  subject  to  the  jury,  much  less  to  instruct 
them  upon  it,  and  least  of  all  to  order  a  verdict  of  guilty  without  consulting  them. 

There  seems  to  have  been  an  impression,  as  the  writer  infers  from  various  notices 
of  the  matter  in  the  public  papers,  that  the  case  had  resolved  itself  into  a  pure 
question  of  law.  Thus,  a  legal  correspondent  of  one  of  our  leading  religious 
papers,  in  defending  the  course  of  Judge  Hunt,  says :  "There  was  nothing  before 
the  court  but  a  pure  question  of  law.  Miss  Anthony  violated  the  law  of  the  State 
intentionally  and  deliberately,  as  she  openly  avowed,  and  when  brought  to  trial  her 
only  defense  was  that  the  law  was  unconstitutional.  Here  was  nothing  whatever 
to  go  to  the  jury."  And  again  he  says:  "  In  jury  trials  all  questions  of  law  are  de- 
cided by  the  judge."  This  writer  is  referred  to  only  as  expressing  what  are  supj)osed 
to  be  the  views  of  many  others. 

To  show,  however,  how  entirely  incorrect  is  this  assumption  of  fact,  I  insert  here 
the. written  points  submitted  by  Miss  Anthony's  counsel  to  the  court,  for  its  instruc- 
l;l  tion  to  the  jury. 

gi  J^\rst. — Tnat  if  the  defendant,  at  the  time  of  voting,  believed  that  she  had  a  right 
J  to  vote,  and  voted  in  good  faith  in  that  belief,  she  is  not  guilty  of  the  oifense  charged. 
J  Second. — In  determining  the  question  whether  she  did  or  did  not  believe  that  she 
J  had  a  right  to  vote,  the  jury  may  take  into  consideration,  as  bearing  upon  that  ques- 
j^,  tion,  the  advice  which  she  received  from  the  counsel  to  whom  she  applied. 

Third. — That  they  may  also  take  into  consideration,  as  bearing  upon  the  same  ques- 
I  tion,  the  fact  that  the  inspectors  considered  the  question  and  came  to  the  conclusion 
J  tliat  she  had  a  right  to  vote. 

J  Fourth.  —That  the  jury  have  a  right  to  find  a  general  verdict  of  guilty  or  not  guilty, 
IS  they  shall  believe  that  she  has  or  has  not  been  guilty  of  the  offense  prescribed  in 
the  statute. 

n  This  certainly  makes  it  clear  that  the  question  was  not  "a  pure  question  of  law," 
p|i  md  that  there  was  "something  to  go  to  the  jury."  And  this  would  be  so  even  if,  as  that 

jvriter  erroneously  supposes.  Miss  Anthony  had  openly  avowed  before  the  court  that 

she  voted. 

But  even  if  this  point  be  wholly  laid  out  of  the  case,  and  it  had  been  conceded  that 
vliss  Anthony  had  knowingly  violated  the  law,  if  she  should  be  proved  to  have  voted 
i)t  all,  so  that  the  only  questions  before  the  court  were,  first,  whether  she  had  voted 
MS  charged,  and  secondly,  whether  the  law  forbade  her  voting;  and  if  in  this  state  of 
he  case  a  hundred  witnesses  had  been  brought  by  the  Government  to  testify  that  she 
lad  "  openly  avowed"  in  their  presence  that  she  had  voted,  so  that  practically  the 


4G 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


question  of  her  having  voted  was  i)rove<l  beyond  all  possible  qnestion,  still  the  judge 
wonkl  have  had  no  right  to  order  a  verdict  of  guilty.  The  proof  that  she  voted  would 
still  be  evidence,  and  mere  evidence,  and  a  judge  has  no  power  whatever  to  deal  with 
evidence.  Ue  can  deal  only  with  the  law  in  the  case,  and  the  jury  alone  can  deal  with 
the  facts. 

But  we  will  go  further  than  this.  We  will  suppose  that  in  New  York,  as  in  some 
of  the  States,  a  defendant  in  a  crinu\jal  case  is  allowed  to  testify,  and  that  Miss 
Anthony  had  gone  upon  the  staml  as  a  witness,  and  had  stated  distinctly  and  un- 
equivocally that  she  did  in  fact  vote  as  charged.  We  must  not  forget  that,  if  this 
had  actually  occurred,  she  would  at  the  same  time  have  stated  that  she  voted  in  the 
full  belief  that  she  had  a  right  to  vote,  and  that  she  was  advised  by  eminent  counsel 
that  she  had  such  a  right;  a  state  of  the  case  which  we  have  before  referred  to  as 
presenting  a  vital  quehtion  of  fact  for  the  jury,  and  which  excludes  the  possibility  of 
the  case  being  legally  dealt  with  by  the  judge  alone;  but  this  point  we  are  laying 
out  of  the  case  in  the-  view  we  are  now  taking  of  it.  We  will  suppose  that  Miss 
Anthony  not  only  testified  that  she  voted  in  fact,  but  also  that  she  had  nobelif^f  that 
she  had  any  right  to  vote;  making  a  case  where,  if  the  court  should  hold  as  a  matter 
of  law  that  she  had  no  right  to  vote,  there  would  seem  to  be  no  possible  verdict  for 
the  jury  to  bring  in  but  that  of  ''guilty." 

Even  in  this  case,  which  would  seem  to  resolve  itself  as  much  as  possible  into  a 
mere  question  of  law,  there  is  yet  no  power  whatever  on  the  part  of  the  judge  to 
order  a  verdict  of  guilty,  but  it  rests  entirely  in  the  judgment  and  conscience  of  the 
jury  what  verdict  they  will  bring  in.  They  may  act  unwisely  and  unconscicntiously, 
perhaps  by  mere  favoritism,  or  a  weak  sympathy,  or  prejudice,  or  on  any  other  inde- 
fensible ground;  but  yet  they  have  entire  power  over  the  matter.  It  is  for  them 
finally  to  say  what  their  verdict  shall  be,  and  the  judge  has  no  power  beyon  i  that  of 
instruction  upon  the  law  involved  in  the  case. 

The  proposition  laid  down  by  the  writer  before  referred  to,  that  "  in  jury  trials  all 
questions  of  law  are  decided  by  the  judge,"  is  not  unqualifiedly  true.  It  is  so  in  civil 
causes,  but  in  criminal  causes  it  has  been  holden  by  many  of  our  best  courts  that  the 
jury  are  judges  of  the  law  as  well  as  of  the  facts.  Pages  could  be  filled  with  authori- 
ties in  support  of  this  proposition.  The  courts  do  hold,  however,  that  the  judges  are 
to  instruct  the  jury  as  to  the  law,  and  that  it  is  their  duty  to  take  the  law  as  thus 
laid  down.  But  it  has  never  been  held  that  if  the  jury  assume  the  responsibility  of 
holding  a  prisoner  not  guilty  in  the  face  of  a  charge  from  the  judge  that  required  a 
verdict  of  guilty,  where  the  question  was  wholly  one  of  law,  they  had  not  full  power 
to  do  it. 

The  question  is  one  ordinarily  of  little  practical  importance,  but  it  here  helps  to 
make  clear  the  very  point  we  are  discussing.  Here  the  judge  laid  down  the  law,  cor- 
rectly we  will  suppose,  certainly  in  terms  that  left  the  jury  uo  doubt  as  to  what  he 
meaut ;  and  here,  by  all  the  authorities,  the  jury  ought,  as  a  matter  of  proper  defer 
euce  in  one  view  or  of  absolute  duty  iu  the  other,  to  have  adopted  the  view  oi 
the  law  given  them  by  the  judge.  But  it  was  in  either  case  the  jury  only  who  could 
apply  the  law  to  the  case.  The  judge  could  instruct,  but  the  jury  only  could  apply 
the  instruction.  That  is,  the  instruction  of  the  judge,  no  matter  how  authoritativ 
we  may  regard  it,  could  find  its  way  to  the  defendant  only  through  the  verdict  of  the 
jury. 

It  is  only  where  the  confession  of  facts  is  matter  of  record  (that  is,  where  the  pleafilec 
or  recorded  in  the  case  admits  them),  that  the  judge  can  enter  up  a  judgment  with 
out  the  finding  of  a  jury.  Thus,  if  the  defendant  pleads  "  guilty,"  there  is  no  uee< 
of  a  jury  finding  him  so.  If,  however,  he  pleads  "  not  guilty,"  then  no  matter  ho 
overwhelming  is  the  testimony  against  him  on  the  trial,  uo  matter  if  a  hundred  wit 
nesses  prove  his  admission  of  all  the  facts,  the  whole  is  not  legally  decisive  like 
plea  of  guilty ;  but  the  question  still  remains  a  question  of  fact,  and  the  jury  alon 
can  determine  what  the  verdict  shall  be.  Iu  other  w^ords,  it  is  no  less  a  question 
fact  for  the  reason  that  the  evidence  is  all  one  way  aud  overwhelming,  or  that  th 
defendant  has  in  his  testimony  admitted  all  the  facts  against  himself. 

The  writer  has  intended  this  article  for  general  rather  than  professional  reader 
and  has  therefore  not  encumbered  it  with  authorities  ;  but  he  has  stated  only  rul 
and  principles  that  are  well  established  and  familiar  to  all  persons  practicing  in  oi 
courts  of  law. 

This  case  illustrates  an  important  defect  in  the  law  with  regard  to  the  revision 
verdicts  and  judgments  in  the  United  States  circuit  court.  In  almost  all  other  conr 
an  application  for  a  new  trial  on  the  ground  of  erroneous  rulings  by  the  judge  is  ma( 
to  a  higher  and  independent  tribunal.  In  this  court,  however,  an  application  for 
new  trial  is  addressed  to  and  decided  by  the  same  judge  who  tried  the  case  and  who 
erroneous  rulings  are  complained  of.  Such  a  motion  was  made  and  argued  by  M 
Anthony's  counsel  before  Judge  Hunt,  who  refused  to  grant  a  new  trial.  Thus  it  w 
Judge  Hunt  alone  who  wpis  to  decide  whether  Judge  Hunt  was  wrong.  It  is  mauifi 
that  the  opportunity  for  securing  justice  even  before  the  most  honest  of  judges  wou 


Coi 

slioi 
tliiii 

ritur 
Mi 

ik 


loo: 


WOMAN  SUFFEAGE. 


47 


be  somewhat  less  than  before  an  entirely  distinct  tribunal,  us  the  judjcje  would  be 
prejudiced  in  favor  of  his  own  opinion,  and  the  best  and  most  learned  of  judges  are 
human  and  fallible  ;  while  if  a  judge  is  disposed  to  be  unfair,  it  is  perfectly  easy  for 
him  to  suppress  all  attempts  of  a  party  injured  by  his  decision  to  set  it  aside. 

The  only  remedy  for  a  party  thus  wronged  is  by  an  appeal  to  the  public.  Such  an 
appeal,  as  a  friend  of  justice  and  of  the  law,  without  regard  to  Miss  Anthony's  case 
in  any  other  aspect,  the  writer  makes  in  this  Article.  The  public,  thus  the  only  ap- 
pellate tribunal,  should  willingly  listen  to  such  a  case  and  pass  its  own  suxireme  and 
decisive  judgment  upon  it. 

The  writer  can  not  but  regard  Judge  Hunt's  course  as  not  only  irregular  as  a  mat- 
ter of  law,  but  a  very  dangerous  encroachment  on  the  right  of  every  person  accused 
to  be  tried  by  a  jury.    It  is  by  yielding  to  such  encroachments  that  liberties  are  lost. 


KEMARKS  BY  MRS.  VIRGINIA  L.  MINOR. 

Miss  Anthony.  Mrs.  Hooker  has  referred  to  the  decision  of  Justiee 
Hunt  in  the  circuit  court  of  the  northern  district  of  New  York  declar- 
ing that  women  are  not  entitled  to  exercise  the  right  to  vote  under  the 
fourteenth  amendment.  I  now  have  the  pleasure  of  introducing  to  you 
Mrs.  Virginia  L.  Minor^  of  Missouri,  whose  case  was  carried  up  to  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and  a  unanimous  decision  given 
against  the  powers  of  the  fourteenth  amendment  to  protect  women  on 
the  ground  that  the  United  States  Constitution  has  no  voters."  Mrs. 
Minor  will  now  address  the  committee.  She  will  read  a  statement  of 
woman's  rights  under  the  Constitution,  as  it  is  prepared  by  her  husband, 
Mr.  Francis  Minor,  who,  it  will  be  remembered,  plead  her  case  before 
the  Supreme  Court  in  1875. 

Mrs.  Minor.  Gentlemen,  in  1884  the  chairman  of  your  committee 
(Mr.  Cockrell)  declared  "that  suflrage  belonged  entirely  to  the  States 
so  long  as  no  class  of  citizens  were  disfranchised."  I  hold  that  women 
are  a  class  of  citizens  in  the  different  States  who  are  disfranchised. 
But  I  am  happy  to  say  the  Senator  must  have  changed  his  opinion  on 
that  subject,  because  I  notice  that  he  has  voted  in  Congress  to  take 
away  suffrage  in  one  of  the  Territories.  He  has  gone  far  beyond  the 
Constitution  in  taking  away  suffrage  from  the  women  of  the  Territory 
of  Utah. 

In  opposition  to  the  Senator  Mr.  Madison,  one  of  the  framers  of  the 
Constitution,  declared,  and  left  it  on  record,  that  '^should  the  people  of 
any  State  by  any  means  be  deprived  of  the  right  of  suffrage,  they 
H  should  appeal  to  the  General  Government."  He  also  goes  on  to  say 
•■  that  "  to  have  left  this  question  to  the  legislation  of  the  States  would 
J|  have  been  impolitic."  The  wisdoni  of  this  prevision  has  been  shown 
J  in  regard  to  the  suffrage  given  by  the  legislature  of  Washington  Ter- 
at  ritory,  where  it  has  been  taken  away  because  of  the  plea  that  it  was 
'^J  not  secured  on  constitutional  grounds. 

2     Now,  gentlemen,  1  wish  to  show  you  from  this  paper  of  Mr.  Minor's 
I  that  we  think  woman's  right  to  vote  is  secured  on  constitutional 
rsl  grounds. 

lea 

n  THE  LAW  OF  FEDERAL  SUFFRAGE 

To  the  National  Woman  Suffrage  Association  : 

You  are  again  in  session  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  your  appeal  to  Congress  to 
propose  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  w  hich  shall  forbid  the  denial  of  your  right 
to  vote  on  account  of  sex. 

Twenty-one  years  have  elapsed  since  you  first  made  application  for  this  purpose, 
and  yet  success  seems  as  distant  as  ever. 

For  this  reason  some  members  of  the  association  are  considering  the  propriety  of 
bringing  the  matter  before  t  he  Supreme  Court  with  the  view  of  securing,  if  possible, 
X  reversal  of  the  decision  in  the  case  of  Minor  vs.  Happersett,  and  I  liave  been  re- 
quested to  state  briefly  the  grounds  upon  which  such  au  application  must  rest. 


48 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


There  is  no  impropriety  or  inconsistence  in  pursuing  both  methods  at  the  same 
time. 

It  will  be  necessary  to  state  a  few  general  propositions. 

Since  the  adoption  of  the  fourteenth  amendment  "all  persons  born  or  naturalized 
in  the  United  States  aud  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof  are  citizens  of  the  United 
States  and  of  the  State  in  which  they  reside." 

This  amendment  for  the  lirst  time  admitted  the  negro  race  to  citizenship.  Men 
aud  women  of  the  white  race  had  always  been  citizens  or  members  of  the  national 
body-politic.  In  that  section  of  the  Constitution  we  are  now  to  consider,  the  term 
used  is  the  people,"  but  Chief-Justice  Taney  tells  us  that  the  words  people  and  citi- 
zens are  synonymous  terms  and  mean  the  same  thing.  (Scott  vs.  Sandford,  lU  How- 
ard.) While  our  first  Chief- Justice,  John  Jay,  speaking  of  the  equality  of  all  persons 
in  political  rights,  said  "the  citizens  of  America  are  equal  as  fellow-citizens  and  as 
joint  tenants  in  the  sovereignty."    (2  Dallas,  472.) 

An  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court,  properly  brought,  would  be  based  upon  the  ground 
that  the  right  of  suffrage  is  already  established  in  the  Federal  Constitution,  and  is  an 
essential  privilege  of  all  American  citizens. 

It  is  not  conferred  in  terms  upon  any  person  or  class  of  persons,  but  inheres  in  and 
attaches  to  a  status  or  condition  of  being,  which  is  expressed  in  the  single  word,  citi- 
zenship. 

Admittance  to  national  citizenship,  either  by  birth  or  naturalization,  endues  the 
person  with  the  right  of  suffrage;  its  exercise  is  regulated  by  law. 

Mr.  Madison,  one  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  said  :  "  The  definition  of  the 
right  of  suffrage  is  justly  regarded  as  a  fundamental  article  of  republican  government." 
It  was  incumbent  on  the  convention  therefore  to  define  and  establish  this  right  in  the 
Constitution."  (Federalist,  No  52.)  The  right  was  so  established  in  section  2,  of 
Article  I,  in  these  words : 

"The  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  composed  of  members  chosen  every  second 
year  by  the  people  of  the  several  States,  and  the  electors  in  each  State  shall  have  the 
qualifications  requisite  for  electors  of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the  State  legisla- 
ture." 

This  section  consists  of  two  clauses.    The  first  relates  to  the  right  of  suffrage,  or 
the  right  to  choose,  vesting  the  right  in  "  the  people  of  the  several  States." 
The  second  clause  relates  to  the  qualifications  of  the  electors. 

As  every  one  knows,  there  is  a  wide  dlstioction  between  right  and  qualification. 
A  person  may  have  the  right  to  vote,  aud  still  not  be  what  is  termed  a  qualified 
elector  for  want  of  the  necessary  qualifications. 

In  this  case  the  right  is  absolute  and  unconditional.  No  reference  whatever  ig 
made  to  the  sex  or  color  of  the  elector.  Citizenship  or  membership  in  the  body 
politic  is  the  only  requisite.  Neither  men,  nor  women,  as  such,  are  referred  to.  To- 
gether they  constitute  the  people,  and  the  people  choose.  This  second  clause  is  thus 
in  entire  accord  with  the  preamble  to  the  Constitution,  which  declares  :  "We,  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  *  *  *  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitutior 
for  the  United  States  of  America,"  retaining  in  their  own  control  this  most  funda 
mental  of  all  the  rights  of  citizenship.  The  Constitution  affords  still  further  proof  oi 
the  existence  of  this  right.  The  fifteenth  amendment,  adopted  eighty  years  subse- 
quent to  the  original  establishment  of  the  right,  declares  that  "  the  rights  of  citizem 
of  the  United  States  to  vote  shall  not  be  denied  or  abridged  by  the  United  States 
or  any  State,  on  account  of  race,  or  color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude.' 
Thus  expressly,  and  in  terms  embracing  all  citizens,  the  right  of  suffrage  is  recog 
nized  as  an  existing  right.  The  sixteenth  amendment  that  you  ask  for  is  couched  ii 
the  same  language  except  that  in  place  of  race  or  color  the  word  sex  is  used 
Now  it  is  clearly  impossible  to  deny  or  abridge  a  right  that  does  not  exist;  and  if  th 
right  of  suffrage  is  not  an  existing  right,  then  the  fifteenth  amendment  is  an  absur< 
abuse  of  language. 

In  construing  this,  and  the  other  recent  amendments,  the  Supreme  Court  adds  it 
testimony  to  the  fact  of  the  existence  of  this  right.  It  said,  "  the  negro  having,  b 
the  fourteenth  amendment,  been  declared  to  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  is  thu 
made  a  voter  in  every  State  of  the  Union."    (Slaughter  House  cases,  16  Wallace.) 

Congress  also  is  committed  to  the  same  position.  I  have  room  only  to  give  th 
title  of  the  act.  It  is  entitled  "  yn  act  to  enforce  the  right  of  citizens  of  the  Unite' 
States  to  vote  in  the  several  States  of  this  Union,  and  for  other  purposes,"  approve 
May  31,  1870. 

Thus,  in  the  most  solemn  manner  possible,  the  Constitution,  the  Supreme  Cour 
and  the  legislative  branch  of  the  Government  are  in  accord  in  recognizing  the  righ 
of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote  as  an  existing  right ;  a  right  established  i 
the  Federal  Constitution,  and  derived  from  no  other  source.  So  much  for  the  right 
next  as  to  qualifications. 

The  Constitution  does  not  lay  down  any  general  rule  applicable  to  all  the  State 
nor  undertake  to  prescribe  qualificatious  for  the  Federal  elector. 


WOMAN  SUPFiiAGE. 


49 


It  was  considered  best  to  require  liim  to  conform  to  such  as  exist  in  the  several 
States  for  State  electors. 

But  this  requirement  by  no  means  confers  upon  the  States  any  power  or  authority 
over  the  right  of  the  Federal  elector;  least  of  all  does  it  authorize  the  States  to  de- 
feat the  right  by  imposing  conditions  with  which  the  Federal  elector  can  not  comply. 

Yet,  in  point  of  fact,  they  have  unlawfully  disfranchised  one-half  of  the  "  people" 
by  the  use  of  the  word  male.  For  the  purpose  of  contesting  the  matter,  and  of  mak- 
ing demand  for  the  right,  a  white  woman  citizen  of  the  United  States,  holding  that 
her  citizenship  ought  to  avail  to  place  her  at  least  upon  the  level  of  the  negro,  ap- 
plied to  the  Supreme  Court  to  protect  her  against  disfranchisement,  and  was  refused, 
the  court  declaring  that  ''the  United  States  has  no  voters  of  its  own  creation." 
(Minor  vs.  Happersett,  21  Wallace.)  This  decision  is  so  manifestly  in  conflict  with 
the  Constitution,  as  well  as  with  the  court's  own  ruling  just  quoted,  that  it  is  likely 
if  the  matter  were  again  presented,  the  court  would  recede  from  its  last  decision. 

The  first  century  of  our  national  life  under  the  Constitution  is  about  to  close.  To 
women  it  has  been  a  century  of  injustice,  since  no  wrong  can  compare  with  that  of 
disfranchisement,  and  while  we  are  singing  pseons  in  honor  of  the  great  instrument 
it  is  well  to  remember  that  women  had  a  share  in  the  work.  At  that  date,  women 
voted  in  New  Jersey  at  all  elections  upon  terms  of  equality  with  men. 

They  voted  for  members  of  the  constitutional  convention  from  that  State.  They 
voted  for  the  ratification  of  the  constitution  when  submitted."  They  voted  for  the 
first,  second,  and  third  Presidents  of  the  United  States.  The  fact  that  wonaen  voted 
in  one  of  the  States  was  well  known  to  those  who  framed  the  Constitution,  and  we 
must  construe  the  instrument  as  they  left  it. 

As  before  said,  neither  men  nor  women  as  such  are  alluded  to.  The  clause  estab- 
lishing suffrage  is  so  worded  as  to  exclude  neither,  but  to  include  both.  So  that, 
whether  you  succeed  through  the  courts  or  through  Congress,  it  will  be  due  to  the 
fact  of  your  citizenship. 

For  the  purpose  you  have  in  view,  that  word  is  to  you  the  most  important  word  in 
the  language. 

In  hoc  signo  vinces,  you  should  place  on  your  badges  and  adopt  it  as  a  motto. 

Francis  Minor. 

Saint  Louis,  January,  1889. 

I  wish  to  ask  the  geutlemeii  of  this  committee,  who  are  now  acting 
for  us  in  Congress,  to  leave  to  their  children  an  inheritance  they  will 
not  have  to  blush  for.  We  want  you  to  show  that  your  prevision  has 
beeu  sufficient  to  look  down  the  vista  of  the  future  and  see  what  must 
inevitably  occur.  Fifty  years  ago  a  member  of  the  Senate  declared 
that  the  ver^^  mention  of  the  subject  of  emancipation  would  never  be 
admitted  in  the  Cougress  of  the  United  States.  It  was  a  woman's  pro- 
phetic voice  that  then  replied :  "  You  can  build  out  the  winds  and  hedge 
out  the  stars,  but  you  can  never  keep  this  question  out  of  Congress." 
(Applause.) 

REMARKS  BY  MRS.  ABIGAIL  SCOTT  DUNIWAY. 

Miss  Anthony.  As  the  committee  have  listened  to  an  argument  in 
which  the  assertion  was  made  that  the  Supreme  Court  has  decided  that 
the  United  States  Government  has  no  power  over  the  question  of  suf- 
frage, I  should  like  to  introduce  to  you  a  representative  from  the  great 
Northwest,  where  suilrage  has  been  given  by  territorial  action,  and 
where  the  judges  appointed  by  tlie  National  Government  have  robbed 
the  women  of  the  Territory  of  their  right  to  vote.  Mrs.  Abigail  Scott 
Dnniway,  of  Oregon,  who  had  a  large  hand  in  gaining  the  suffrage  bill 
in  the  Territory  of  Washington,  and  who,  therefore,  is  quite  able  to 
present  the  facts  in  the  case,  will  now  address  the  committee. 

Mrs.  DuNiWAY.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  had  thought  to  oifer 
a  little  apology  for  the  seeming  temerity  of  my  coming  before  you  on 
such  an  occasion,  presumably  to  instruct  you  in  the  law,  but  I  am 
happy  to  state  that  the  able  paper  read  by  our  delegate  from  Missouri 
(Mrs.  Minor)  has  made  that  apology  unnecessary,  a-nd  I  shall  proceed 
at  once  to  give  historic  facts. 
S.  Rep.  2543  4 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


In  the  year  1883,  amid  the  mingled  acclaim  of  booming  guns  and  ring- 
ing bells,  it  was  announced  to  all  our  people  that  the  letrislative  as- 
sembly ot  Washington  Territory  had  passed  a  bill,  and  the  governor 
had  approved  the  act,  enfranchising  women.  Everything  went  well 
with  these  newl3^-enfranchised  citizens  for  a  time,  buta  change  in  admin- 
is  ration  was  followed  by  a  change  in  our  territorial  judiciary,  and  the 
result  was  that  means  were  soon  discovered  whereby  a  flaw  or  techni- 
cality in  the  construction  of  the  law  enabled  them  to  pronounce  it  un- 
constitutional, the  ground  taken  being  that  the  purpose  of  the  bill  was 
not  expressed  in  the  title  to  the  act.  There  were  some  thirty-five  bills 
in  the  same  condition.  We  appealed  to  our  Senators  from  Oregon,  one 
of  whom  (Mr.  Dolph)  I  am  proud  to  say,  has  been  grandly  re-elected 
for  another  six  years'  term  in  this  great  capital,  who  has  been  one  of  our 
most  consistent  champions  from  the  beginning.  These  gentlemen  ac- 
ceded to  our  request,  and  a  bill  or  resolution  was  passed  through  the 
Senate  validating  all  those  laws.  When  the  bill  came  up  in  the  Iloiise 
it  was  objected  to  by  a  gentleman  from  Virginia,  I  think,  and  because 
there  was  an  objection  under  parliamentary  rule  the  "  omnibus  bill'* 
could  not  be  passed  unless  the  clause  enfranchising  women  should  be 
stricken  out. 

Eealizing  that  we  were  blocked  in  this  manner,  and  wishing  to  be 
law-abiding,  however  much  the  laws  might  oppress  us,  we  went  to  work 
to  secure  the  re-enactment  of  the  law,  working  quietly,  and,  as  we 
thought^  modestly  and  judiciously,  to  secure  the  pledge  from  the  in- 
coming or  next-convening  legislature  that  they  would  re-enact  the 
Law.  To  the  surprise  of  our  opponents  that  legislature,  which  had  been 
elected  previously  by  the  votes  of  women  largely  (of  course  we  do 
not  overlook  the  help  and  co-operation  of  the  men),  re-enacted  the  law, 
this  time  making  no  mistake  about  the  title. 

Again  the  universal  sound  of  acclaim  went  forth  throughout  oui 
borders,  and  everywhere  we  sounded  paeans  of  praise  to  the  chivalric 
and  patriotic  spirit  that  had  moved  the  members  of  the  legislature  tc 
again  recognize  our  rights. 

Time  went  on,  and  at  the  next  general  election  one  woman's  vote, 
among  the  many  whose  votes  were  received,  was  refused.  I  allude  tc 
Nevada  Bloomer,  whose  case  is  now  upon  the  docket  of  the  supreme 
court.  Mrs.  Bloomer  brought  suit  for  the  recognition  of  her  right  tc 
vote  before  the  supreme  court  of  the  Territory,  and  the  decision  was 
adverse  to  her  claim,  the  decision  being  made  upon  the  ground  thai 
the  Territories  have  no  right  to  pass  a  law  enfranchising  their  citizens, 
or,  in  other  words,  that  the  Territories  have  no  jurisdiction  over  the 
qualifications  of  their  own  voters.  Mrs.  Minor  has  already  explained 
to  you  the  absurdities  of  this  decision,  and  we  come  to  day  strong  in 
the  hope  that  inasmuch  as  this  case,  being  on  the  docket,  will  require 
years  to  reach  it  and  woman's  condition  in  the  Territory  calls  for  im 
mediate  action,  that  your  honorable  committee  will  at  once  take  such 
measures  as  to  recognize  the  wrong  to  which  our  sex  has  been  sub- 
jected, and  will,  in  the  spirit  of  justice,  rebuke  this  usurpation  of  the 
Territorial  organic  act  of  Congress,  of  which  usurpation  we  are  made 
the  victims. 

As  our  leader.  Miss  Anthony,  informs  me  that  I  must  not  trespass 
beyond  ten  minutes,  and  as  it  is  impossible  for  a  woman  to  say  ver^ 
much  in  ten  minutes,  I  gladly  give  way  to  others. 


WOMAT^  SUFFRAGE. 


5i 


REMARKS  BY  MISS  ALICE  STONE  BLACKWELL. 

Miss  Anthony.  I  now  have  the  pleasure  of  introducing  to  you  Miss 
Alice  Stone  Blackwell,  of  Boston,  one  of  the  editors  of  the  Woman's 
Journal.  All  of  you  who  know  anything  of  the  history  of  our  move- 
ment know  that  she  is  the  daughter  of  Lucy  Stone,  who  was  one  of  the 
originators,  and  has  been  for  the  whole  forty  years  one  of  the  leaders, 
of  our  movement. 

Miss  Blackwell.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  feel  that  I  come 
before  you  a  very  inadequate  representative  of  the  Woman's  Journal 
and  the  American  Woman  Suffrage  Association ;  but  at  the  same  time 
I  am  glad  of  the  opportunity  which  Miss  Anthony's  kindness  has  af- 
forded me  to  say  a  word  in  behalf  of  the  proposed  constitutional 
amendment  giving  suffrage  to  women,  because  while  what  I  can  say 
may  not  be  of  much  value  in  itself,  it  gives  me  an  opportunity  to  show 
which  side  I  am  on  in  desiring  suffrage  to  be  granted  to  women. 

In  reading  the  various  Congressional  debates  on  the  subject  of  woman 
suffrage,  we  find  a  number  of  different  objections  offered.  Very  little, 
however,  is  generally  said  as  to  what  seems  to  most  of  us  women  who 
wish  to  vote  the  fundamental  basis  of  our  claim.  The  general  argu- 
Iment  for  woman  suffrage  is  the  same  as  the  argument  for  having  a  re- 
publican form  of  government  rather  than  a  monarchy.  We  say  that 
it  is  fair  and  right  that  those  who  are  required  to  obey  the  laws  should 
have  a  voice  in  making  them,  and  that  those  who  are  required  to  pay 
taxes  should  have  a  voice  in  deciding  what  shall  be  the  amount  of  the 
tax  and  how  the  money  raised  by  taxation  shall  be  spent,  and  as  we  can 
Qot  suit  everybody,  we  take  everybody's  opinion  and  go  according  to  the 
wiidx  of  the  majority.  That  seems  to  be  on  the  whole  the  fairest  way, 
lud  that,  roughly  stated,  is  the  principle  of  republican  government.  A 
v^ote  is  simply  a  written  expression  ot  opinion,  which  is  written  down 
lud  put  into  a  box  so  that  it  may  be  counted. 

In  thus  taking  the  sense  of  the  community  there  are  certain  classes 
)f  persons  who  are  always  passed  over,  because  their  opinions,  for  one 
:  reason  and  another,  are  not  considered  worth  counting.  The  laws  of  the 
lifferent  States  differ,  but  all  are  agreed  in  excluding  children,  idiots, 
I  unatics,  felons,  and  women.  There  are  good  and  obvious  reasons  for 
.naking  all  these  exceptions  but  the  last.  Of  course  it  is  self  evident 
l  ;hat  the  opinions  of  children  ought  not  to  be  counted,  nor  those  of 
diots,  lunatics,  and  criminals.  Is  there  any  reason  at  all  why,  in  reck- 
Iniing  up  the  opinions  of  the  community,  no  account  shall  be  taken  of 
|:he  opinions  of  women? 

i   Let  us  try  a  few  of  the  objections  that  are  usually  offered  and  see 
A'hether  they  are  sound.    One  point  that  is  often  brought  up  in  the  ob- 
ections  to  woman  suffrage  in  Congressional  debates  is  that  women  do 
jot  need  to  vote,  because  they  are  virtually  represented  already  by  their 
lusbands,  fathers,  brothers,  etc. 
The  first  difficulty  with  the  doctrine  of  virtual  representation  is  that 
^  t  is  not  according  to  numbers.    I  knew  a  man  once  who  had  a  wife,  a 
;  vidowed  mother,  five  unmarried  sisters,  and  five  unmarried  daughters. 
,  According  to  this  doctrine  of  virtual  representation  his  vote  represented 
!  limself  and  all  those  women,  and  it  counted  one,  while  the  vote  of  his 
bachelor  neighbor  next  door,  without  a  female  relative  in  the  world, 
ounted  one,  just  the  same.    Thus  there  is  an  inequality  even  when  all 
he  women  of  the  family  think  just  as  their  male  rehitives  do.  Of 
ourse  sometimes  even  in  the  most  united  family  this  can  not  be  tho 


52  WOMAN  SUFFRAGE.  / 

case.    How  is  a  man  to  represent  his  wife  and  daughters  if  they  do  not' 
all  think  alike,  or  if  they  do  not  all  think  as  he  does?    In  my  own  State' 
there  is  one  Senator  who  has  two  daughters.    One  of  them  is  a  woman 
suffragist.    The  other  is  very  much  o]>posed  to  woman  suffrage,  SO4 
much  so  that  she  burns  the  Woman's  Journal  when  it  comes  into  the  • 
house  before  her  father  can  get  hold  of  it.    How  is  that  gentleman  to 
represeut  the  opinions  of  his  two  daughters  on  that  subject?  Some- 
times a  man  has  a  widowed  mother,  a  wife,  and  a  daughter.    One  of 
them  may  be  a  Republican,  another  a  Probibitionist,  another  a  Dem-  i 
ocrat.    How  can  he  represent  those  three  women  by  one  vote  unless 
he  could  be,  like  Cerebus,  three  gentlemen  at  once. 

Then,  again,  even  in  the  cases  where  a  man  tries  honestly  and  does 
his  best  to  represent  his  woman-kind,  this  principle  of  virtual  repre- 
sentation is  still  imperfect.  I  read  the  other  day  of  a  man  who  under- 
took honestly  and  did  his  very  best  to  represent  his  women.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  Greenback  party.  He  had  three  daughters  who  were 
all  Eepublicans,  and  neither  he  nor  his  daughters  believed  in  woman 
suffrage.  The  whole  family  held  that  the  women  of  a  family  ought  to 
be  represented  by  the  male  members  of  it.  When  the  election  ap- 
I)roached  those  three  daughters  all  sought  their  father  and  represented 
to  him  how  very  wrong  it  would  be  in  him,  when  three  members  of  the 
family  were  Republicans,  to  cast  theonly  vote  of  that  family  for  the  Green- 
back party.  They  said,  "  You  are  our  representative;  you  always  said 
so,  and  we  believe  it.  We  are  Republicans,  and  we  want  you  to  vote 
to  represent  us."  The  father  saw  the  i)oint,  and  actually  did  it.  Though 
himself  a  Greenbacker,  he  went  and  voted  the  Republican  ticket  in 
order  to  re})resent  his  daughters.  That  is  the  best  that  can  be  done 
under  that  system.  But  do  you  not  see  that  even  that  way  was  not 
fair?  The  Greenback  candidate  was  entitled  to  one  vote  out  of  that 
family,  and  he  did  not  get  it.  The  Republican  candidate  was  entitled 
to  three  votes,  and  he  only  got  one. 

So  I  think  we  are  justitied  in  saying,  with  James  Otis  in  the  old  rev- 
olutionary times,  that  there  is  really  no  such  thing  as  virtual  represeuta 
tion  ;  that  it  is  really  a  delusion  and  a  snare.  The  only  sense  in  whict 
it  is  true  is  this:  I  have  no  doubt  that  men  in  general  mean  well  bj 
women,  feel  friendly  to  them,  and  mean  to  make  such  laws  for  them  a£ 
they  consider  for  their  good.  It  is  equally  true  that  women  in  genera 
feel  friendly  towards  men,  and  we  find  women  as  well  fitted  to  mak< 
laws  for  the  men.  I  have  no  doubt  there  are  many  such  women,  but 
I  think  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  you  would  be  satisfied  with  the  re- 
sults of  our  efforts  in  that  line,  and  I  am  sure  that  none  of  you  would 
like  to  occupy  such  a  position. 

Then  it  is  often  said  of  women  that  they  will  be  contaminated  and 
degraded  by  the  ballot.  Men  use  this  argument  who  themselves  would 
take  a  musket  on  their  shoulders  and  fight  to  the  death  if  it  was  pro-f/ 
posed  to  deprive  them  of  their  right  of  suffrage.  They  think  that  the  I 
right  for  them  is  invaluable,  but  when  anything  is  said  fibout  letting 
women  vote  they  draw  such  a  picture  of  the  hardships,  horrors,  and  con- 
tamination in  the  filthy  pool  of  politics,  all  of  which  they  say  is  involved 
in  suffrage,  that  you  would  think  it  was  the  greatest  kindness  in  the 
world  on  their  part  to  refuse  to  let  women  have  a  share  in  the  ballot. 

There  is  a  story  told  of  a  boy  whose  little  sister  found  an  apple  and 
began  to  eat  it.  The  boy  rushed  up  to  her  and  with  horror  and  conster- 
nation told  her  the  apple  was  green  ;  that  if  she  ate  it  she  certainly 
would  have  the  cholera.  The  child  threw  the  apple  down,  when  hei 
brother  immediately  picked  it  up  and  began  to  eat  it.    The  little  girl 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


53 


looked  at  him  surprised  for  a  few  moments  and  said,  ^'Will  it  not  give 
you  the  cholera,  too?"  ^'Oh,  no,"  said  he,  "boys  don't  have  cholera." 
rLaughter.] 

I  ^  If  the  exercise  of  the  right  of  suffrage  is  really  contaminating  we 
3Ught  to  establish  a  monarchy  instead  of  a  republic.  We  ought  to  re- 
strict the  right  of  suffrage  as  much  as  possible  and  spare  it  to  men  as 
well  as  women. 

It  seems  to  me  self-evident  that  the  right  of  suffrage  is  degrading  or 
not  according  to  the  spirit  in  which  you  exercise  it.  lb  must  be  degrad- 
ing to  anybody  to  whom  it  is  simply  a  selfish  scramble  for  office,  but  I 
think  it  can  hardly  be  otherwise  than  ennobling  to  any  one  to  take  an 
intelligent  interest  in  the  affairs  of  the  country,  and  cast  an  honest  vote 
for  the  best  men  and  the  best  measures. 

:  Then  it  is  said  that  the  bad  women  will  vote,  and  the  argument  is  put 
jin  such  a  shape  that  you  would  think  the  bad  women  formed  a  majority 
^instead  of  being  a  very  small  minority  of  the  feminine  population. 
\  Then  it  is  said  that  women  must  not  vote  because  they  are  too  good 
to  vote.  The  very  same  people  who  have  been  saying  so  much  about 
bad  women  will  turn  and  say,  "  Women  must  not  vote  because  they 
are  angels."  All  we  can  say  in  regard  to  that  is,  if  women  are  angels 
it  is  very  unreasonable  to  be  afraid  of  the  effects  of  thoir  voting,  for 
the  effect  conld  hardly  be  otherwise  than  good.  There  was  once  a  lit- 
tle boy  afraid  to  go  to  bed  in  the  dark.  His  mother  told  him  not  to  be 
lafraid,  because  the  angels  would  watch  over  him.  But  he  said,  "  It  is 
th3  angels  themselves  I  am  afraid  of."  [Laughter.]  The  people  who 
are  so  much  afraid  of  woman's  vote  because  women  are  angels,  are  just 
in  the  unreasonable  position  of  the  little  boy.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
women  are  only  ordinary  human  beings,  why  should  they  not  have  or- 
(iinary  human  rights? 

i  1  Then  it  is  said  that  if  women  vote  they  must  hold  office.  A  very  in- 
telligent Democratic  lawyer  told  me  once  the  only  objection  in  his  mind, 
aie  said,  I  can  see  perfectly  well  that  all  the  objections  generally  made 
,0  woman  suffrage  are  entirely  illogical  when  carried  to  their  logical 
Oonclusions,  but  suppose  the  mother  of  a  young  family  is  elected  to 
r'ongiess,  what  is  to  become  of  the  children  f  He  had  before  his  eyes 
4  dreadful  vision  of  half  the  homes  of  the  country  left  desolate  because 
I'he  mothers  had  been  sent  to  Congress.  It  did  not  occur  to  him  that 
Piot  one  person  in  a  thousand  can  go  to  Congress  anyway,  and  that  no- 
body is  obliged  to  go  against  his  will.  The  mother  of  a  young  family 
would  not  be  likely  to  ask  to  go  to  Congress,  and  if  she  did  ask  she 
would  not  likely  be  sent.  Yet  for  all  that,  she  might  have  a  very  defi- 
nite opinion  as  to  what  sort  of  a  man  she  wanted  to  send  to  make  laws 
for  her  and  her  children,  and  is  there  any  reason  why  her  opinion  should 
not  be  counted  on  this  subject  along  with  her  husband's,  father's,  and 
brother's. 

In  this  matter  of  bad  women  there  is  one  point  that  I  think  should 
J  be  brought  out,  and  that  is,  the  argument  from  experience  in  this 
thing.  You  can  not  tell  anything  about  it  until  you  have  tried  it. 
'  You  can  see  that  there  is  no  reason  to  expect  that  bad  women  would 
vote  more  generally  than  good  ones,  and  in  this  matter  an  ounce  of 
experiment  is  worth  a  pound  of  theory.  Mrs.  Duniway  has  told  you 
something  about  the  experience  in  Washington  Territory;  Mrs.  Johns 
will  tell  you  about  the  experience  in  Kansas.  Then  we  have  to  bring 
in  fourteen  States  where  women  have  the  right,  more  or  less  restricted, 
to  vote  on  school  questions.  In  every  one  of  those  States  women  ex- 
ercise the  right. 


54 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


The  complaint  in  Massaclinseits  for  a  long  time  was  'tliat  odIj  the 
best  women  voted.  At  our  last  scliool  election  in  Boston  we  had,  I 
think,  very  evident  proof  that  whenever  women- are  allowed  to  vote  on 
a  question  which  reaches  out  to  general  public  opinion,  and  on  which 
tliere  is  reason  to  vote,  they  will  vote. 

There  was  a  controversy  that  arose  in  regard  to  the  use  of  text-books 
in  the  schools.  Indeed,  there  was  a  very  general  impression  that  the 
text-books  had  been  tampered  with  in  the  interest  of  the  Koman  Cath- 
olic Church,  and  that  the  facts  of  history  were  not  fairly  presented.  I 
thi?»k  myself  there  was  something  to  be  said  on  both  sides  of  the  ques- 
tion, but  many  felt  that  the  schools  were  in  danger,  and  21,000  womeii 
registered  to  vote,  paying  a  voluntary  tax  in  order  to  do  so,  and  goin/^ 
through  a  very  troublesome  process  to  get  registered.  When  voting - 
day  came  a  northeast  storm  was  i aging,  and  when  a  northeast  storm 
rages  in  Boston  it  is  something  formidable.  But  for  all  that,  18,000  or 
19,000  of  those  women  came  out  to  the  polls.  They  not  only  cam 3 
themselves  but  they  brought  with  them  many  husbands  and  brothers 
who  were  not  in  the  habit  of  voting.  So  the  control  of  the  city  gov  - 
ernment of  Boston  was  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Democratic  ad- 
ministration, which  had  held  it  for  many  years,  and  was  given  over  to 
the  Bepublicans.  Both  parties  agreed  that  it  was  owing  to  the  votes 
of  the  women  that  this  happened. 

I  see  that  my  time  is  out,  and  I  shall  not  detain  yon.  There  are 
many  more  things  that  could  be  said  in  favor  of  woman  suffrage.  It  is 
told  of  Mr.  Lincoln  that  during  the  very  busiest  period  of  his  adminii^- 
tration  a  man  came  to  him  to  protest  against  an  appointment  he  had 
made  of  some  one  as  postmaster.  This  man  was  a  great  bore,  and 
talked  on  and  on.  Mr.  Lincoln  was  too  polite  to  send  him  away,  bi  t 
waited  while  this  man  enumerated  every  possible  reason  he  could  thin  k 
of  why  the  person  was  unfit  for  postmaster.  Finally,  to  bring  his  argu- 
ment  to  a  climax,  he  said :  "  Mr.  Lincoln,  the  man  you  have  appoint(  ^. 
has  no  more  sense  than  an  oyster."  *^  Well,"  said  Mr.  Lincoln,  "  2- 
oyster  is  a  very  stupid  creature,  but  it  does  know  some  things  wort- 
knowing;  it  does  know  how  to  shut  up."  [Laughter.]  I  will  try^j 
show,  gentlemen,  that  a  woman  does  know  sometimes  how  1:0  shut  up 

Senator  Blair.  Will  you  not  state,  if  you  know,  the  registration  o,i 
women  in  Boston  on  the  occasion  you  speak  of?  « 

Miss  Blackwell.  The  registration  of  women  was  21,000  and  sonfie 
odd. 

Senator  Blair.  The  vote  was  how  many  ? 

Miss  Blackwell.  The  vote  is  not  exactly  known.  The  only  wa  y 
they  can  get  the  vote  is  by  taking  the  highest  number  of  votes  cast  for 
mayor  by  the  men  and  the  highest  number  of  votes  cast  for  any  mem- 
ber of  the  school  committee.  One  man's  name  was  on  all  the  tickets  (^f 
the  school  committee.  It  was  a  curious  fact  that  in  this  controvers  y 
which  turned  on  this  question,  the  one  man  whose  name  was  on  all  th  e 
tickets  was  a  Jew.  They  could  agree  upon  him,  and  there  were  so  man  y 
votes  cast  for  him  as  to  show  that  at  least  about  17,000  women  had  vote(  1. 
A  great  many  women  had  scratched  the  name  of  this  Jew  from  ti  e 
tickets.  He  was  not  only  a  Jew,  but  a  freethinker,  and  he  had  used 
language  which  was  distasteful  to  many  women  of  the  orthodox  cliurche 
He  had  spoken  of  Jesus  Christ  as  an  amiable  young  enthusiast,  an  d 
had  very  much  shocked  the  women  who  belonged  to  the  orthodo  v. 
churches.  So  his  name  was  largely  scratched,  and  there  is  no  way  cf 
getting  at  the  exact  number  of  women  who  voted.  It  was  about  17,00(ij, 
plus  the  women  who  scratched  this  gentleman's  name.  f 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


55 


Senator  Blair.  Do  you  kuow  what  the  perceutage  of  the  vote  as 
compared  with  the  registration  w^as,  and  how  that  compared  with  the 
voting  of  the  men  ? 

Miss  Blackwell.  I  can  not  tell  you  exactly,  but  it  is  very  generally 
claimed,  in  the  absence  of  any  detinite  statistics,  that  the  women  voted 
much  more  generally  in  i)roportion  to  the  registration  than  the  men. 
The  Boston  Transcript  published  a  long  list  of  various  wards,  in  which 
only  one,  two,  or  three  women  out  of  several  hundred  had  failed  to  vote, 
and  oftentimes  a  very  good  reason  w^as  given  for  her  absence;  something 
which  made  it  imi)ossible  for  her  to  vote.  Mrs.  Shattuck  also  has  studied 
this  question. 

Mrs.  Shattuck.  I  think  it  was  80  per  cent,  of  the  w^omeii  who  were 
registered,  and  therefore  fully  qualified,  who  voted.  That  is  the  state- 
ment I  saw,  and  I  suppose  it  was  authoritative. 

Senator  Blair.  I  had  seen  that  statement — I  did  not  know  whether 
it  was  questioned — and  80  per  cent,  was  said  to  be  a  larger  per  cent, 
than  of  the  men  who  voted. 

J\Iiss  Hatch,  of  Boston.  The  registration  of  women  in  Boston  was 
20,416. 

REMARKS  BY  MRS.  LAURA  M.  JOHNS. 

Miss  Anthony.  Mrs.  Johns  is  the  next  speaker  1  had  proposed  to 
present,  if  the  committee  is  through  asking  questions  of  Miss  Blackwell. 
The  Boston  election  has  settled  two  points  for  us,  at  least.  First,  that 
women  will  vote  if  they  have  a  chance:  and  second,  that  they  will  vote 
just  the  way  they  want  to  when  they  do  vote — two  very  good  points,  you 
see.  I  now  introduce  to  you  Mrs.  Laura  M.  Johns,  of  Kansas,  where, 
as  the  committee  know,  women  have  for  the  past  two  years  enjoyed  the 
right  to  vote  in  all  the  cities  of  the  State — two  hundred  and  eighty-three 
in  number. 

Mrs.  Johns.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  suppose  the  reason  why 
our  general  orders  me  up  here  to  speak,  though  the  weakest  member 
of  her  staff,  is  because  1  can  testify  to  3'ou  of  some  things  whereof  I 
kuow  in  a  State  where  woman  suffrage  is  on  trial*.  The  usefulness  of 
woman  suffrage  in  Kansas  is  gauged  in  the  minds  of  people  outside  of 
our  State  mainly  by  representations  of  newspapers.  It  appears  that 
certain  people  know  a  great  many  things  which  are  not  quite  so,  and 
have  reported  a  number  of  things  that  are  far  from  true,  and  very  erro- 
neous impressions  are  made  upon  many  minds  j  so  when  Kansas  people 
go  abroad  or  w  hen  they  read  papers  outside  of  their  State  they  learn 
a  great  many  very  novel  and  remarkable  things  about  the  workings  of 
woman  suffrage  in  Kansas — things  that  are  remarkable  chiefly  for  the 
conspicuous  absence  of  truth — and  we  have  found  ourselves  quite  help- 
less in  getting  our  statements  of  facts  or  corrections  put  before  the 
readers  of  the  falsehoods. 

A  favorite  romance  of  the  newspapers  has  been  that  we  had  very  dis- 
reputable scenes  at  our  polling  places,  in  consequence  of  the  presence 
of  women  there,  and  that  we  were  obliged  to  come  in  contact  with  inci- 
dents and  people  extremely  damaging  and  disagreeable.  The  truth  of 
the  matter  simply  is,  that  women  met  with  nothing  exceedingly  dread- 
ful at  our  polling  places,  and  good  sensible  people  would  be  very  likely 
to  suppose  that  such  was  the  case.  We  met  with  nothing  to  molest  us 
or  make  us  afraid.    ISTobody  was  monstrously  unmannerly. 

The  first  effect  of  the  passage  of  the  woman  suffrage  Iaw%  in  conse- 
quence of  the  prospective  presence  of  women  at  the  polls,  was  the  enact- 


56 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


ment  of  our  fifty-foot  law.  The  euactmeiit  of  this  law  was  the  direct 
consequence  of  the  woman  suffrage  law.  This  fifty-foot  law  provides 
that  nobody,  except  those  just  about  to  cast  a  vote,  shall  stand  within 
50  feet  of  the  polls.  Those  who  wish  to  deny  as  much  as  possible  to  the 
chiims  of  woman  suffrage,  say  that  the  good  order  we  had  in  those  elec- 
tions is  due  entirely  to  the  operation  of  this  law;  which  we  deny.  But 
let  them  say  so.  The  fifty-foot  law  owes  its  existence  to  the  passage  of 
the  woman  suffrage  law,  and  therefore  the  good  order  at  our  polling 
places  was  due  to  woman  suffrage. 

The  next  effect  was  visible  in  the  moving  of  our  polling-places  into 
more  decent  quarters.  "  The  women  are  coming,"  said  the  authorities, 
"  and  we  must  have  fit  places  for  them.'^ 

-  The  next  consequence  was  the  appointment  of  many  women  as  judges 
and  clerks  of  elections.  The  presence  of  these  women  made  profanity 
and  disorder  very  unlikely,  and  I  am  glad  to  tell  you  that  the  women 
did  this  work  quite  as  well  as  the  men,  and  you  will  be  glad  to  know 
that  they  received  exactly  the  same  wages  that  the  men  received — a 
circumstance  that  does  not  happen  always,  even  in  this  progressive  day 
and  age.  Thus  woman's  suffrage  even  at  the  very  inception  ushers  in 
the  dawn  of  a  day  of  equal  wages  for  equal  work. 

It  was  stated  by  the  newspapers  (and  I  have  found  people  who  are 
quite  ready  to  believe  it)  tliat  bad  women  voted  in  our  elections.  The 
fact  is  that  we  met  with  no  more  of  these  women,  came  no  more  in 
contact  with  them,  saw  no  more  of  them,  were  no  more  annoyed  by 
their  presence  at  the  polling- places  than  we  are  in  cars,  streets,  and 
stores.  They  simply  voted  and  went  swiftly  away.  In  fact  we  saw  not 
many  of  this  class  of  women  at  the  polls.  We  saw  not  so  many  bad 
women  there  as  we  saw  bad  men;  and  indeed  how  should  we,  since 
there  are  not  so  many  of  the  former,  as  the  records  of  crime  show.  We 
certainly  saw  many  men  there  who  were  not  well  prepared  to  cast  the 
first  stone;  but,  as  in  the  time  of  Christ,  that  was  the  class  of  men  who 
made  the  complaint.  I  think  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  noise  they  made 
about  it  and  their  giving  the  matter  to  the  newspapers,  many  of  us 
would  have  been  unaware  of  the  presence  of  bad  women  at  our  polling- 
places.  .  And  why  'have  not  bad  women  just  as  good  right  to  vote  as 
ijad  men?  How  much  more  harm  will  a  bad  woman's  vote  do  to  this 
Government  than  a  bad  man's  vote? 

But  that  class  of  women  are  caring  nothing  about  this  movement. 
They  do  not  vote  unless  they  are  brought  out  by  their  male  support- 
ers. In  our  first  election  it  was  the  object  of  the  opposition  to  make 
the  magdalens  prominent  at  our  polling-places  in  order  to  bring  dis- 
credit upon  the  movement,  but  such  swift  opprobrium  fell  upon  the 
men  and  upon  the  side  undertaking  to  do  this  thing,  that  in  the  sec- 
ond election  little  of  such  effort  was  made,  and  as  a  consequence,  a  very 
much  smaller  number  of  this  class  of  women  voted. 

Another  favorite  fiction  of  the  newspapers  was,  that  the  enfranchise- 
ment of  the  women  of  Kansas  simply  added  to  the  number  of  voters, 
without  making  any  material  difference  in  the  results ;  that  we  all  voted 
just  like  our  husbands.  The  truth  of  it  is  that  we  voted  no  oftener  like 
our  husbands  did  than  our  husbands  voted  like  we  did,  and  we  voted 
no  oftener  the  way  our  husbands  did  than  sons  voted  like  their  fathers 
did.  The  fact  that  sons  votelike  their  fathers  do,  quite  generally,  never 
seems  to  have  occurred  to  anybody  as  a  good  and  sufficient  reason  for 
disfranchising  the  sons,  even  while  the  fathers  were  living  to  repre- 
sent them,  which  they  cou'd  more  adequately  do  than  represent  their 
daughters  and  wives. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


57 


Senator  Blair.  How  about  the  quarrels  which  resulted  at  home  1 

Mrs.  Johns.  I  wish  to  say  that  the  tide  of  domestic  happiness  flows 
on  in  Kansas  as  softly  and  smoothly  as  it  did  before  the  women  voted. 
If  you  were  to  travel  all  over  the  State  I  think  you  would  not  suppose 
from  domestic  infelicities  that  the  women  had  ev  ^r  voted  in  our  State. 
I  kuow  of  no  cases  of  family  quarrel  arising  from  the  wife  voting  difi'er- 
ently  from  the  way  in  which  her  husband  voted,  and  I  know  personally 
and  from  report  of  hundreds  of  instances  in  which  wives,  especially 
upon  tbe  question  of  the  moral  life  of  the  candidate,  or  when  the  ques- 
tion of  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  was  up,  voted  a  ticket 
directly  opposite  to  that  which  their  husbands  voted.  I  know  of  only 
one  case  in  which  there  was  any  difficulty  resulting  therefrom,  and  that 
was  the  case  of  a  man  who  believed  tbat  he  owned  his  wife,  that  he  owned 
all  her  opinions,  all  her  property,  tbat  she  was  entirely  his  possession ; 
and  as  he  was  disabused  of  that  idea  by  the  line  which  was  imposed 
upon  him  for  his  conduct,  I  think  probably  he  has  changed  his  mind. 

Senator  Blair.  In  these  cases  of  disagreement  in  the  matter  of  pro- 
hibition which  way  did  the  wife  vote,  as  a  rule'? 

Mrs.  Johns.  The  wife,  as  a  rule,  voted  for  the  officers  who  she  be- 
lieved w^ould  enforce  the  prohibitory  law. 

Senator  Palmier.  What  proportion  of  the  women  do  you  suppose 
voted  for  prohibition  ? 

Mrs.  Johns.  I  am  not  prepared  to  state  the  percentage,  but  I  believe 
that  not  only  a  majority,  but  the  larger  part  of  the  body  of  women  elec- 
tors always  voted  that  way. 

Senator  Blair.  How  many  voted  ? 

Mrs.  Johns.  Very  nearly  30,000  women  voted  at  the  one  regular  elec- 
tion we  have  had. 

Miss  Anthony.  Sixty-six  thousand  men  at  that  time  voted  and  30,000 
women. 

Mrs.  Johns.  Our  women  voted  with  a  great  deal  of  independence — 
more  than  was  expected.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  men  of  Kan- 
sas are  largely  in  the  majority.  All  these  facts  must  be  taken  into  ac- 
count when  the  women's  vote  is  counted  up.  It  must  be  remembered 
also  that  the  only  regular  election  in  which  we  have  taken  part  came 
ver3'  soon  after  the  passage  of  the  law,  too  soon  for  fair  registration.  I 
do  not  think  anybody  could  say  that  the  women  of  Kansas  had  half  a 
chance  to  register. 

Senator  Blair.  When  will  the  next  election  occur  ? 

Mrs.  Johns.  It  will  occur  next  April.  The  time  was  too  short  for 
registration.  Many  of  our  city  clerks  kept  the  books  open  some  time 
after  the  date  designated  by  law,  in  order  that  the  women  might  have 
a  better  chance,  but  in  other  cities  the  already  too  short  time  was 
made  shorter  by  the  refusal  of  the  clerks  to  keep  open  tbe  books. 

Senator  Blair.  What  seems  to  be  tbe  prospect  of  registration  for 
the  coming  election  ?    Will  it  be  larger  in  proportion  or  smaller 

Mrs.  Johns.  The  registration  has  alreaily  begun.  It  began  very 
soon  after  the  books  were  opened  the  first  of  January.  The  prospect 
is  that  the  registration  will  be  larger  than  it  was  in  eitlier  the  first  or 
the  second  year. 

In  the  first  regular  election,  two-thirds  of  our  women  of  voting  age 
registered,  and  about  half  of  them  went  to  the  polls.  Of  those  who 
were  registered  and  did  not  go  to  the  polls  there  were  many  wbo  re- 
fused to  go  because  neither  of  the  candidates  were  men  whom  they 
could  conscientiously  support  j  others  simply  did  not  go  because  of  the 


68 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


two  candidates,  it  made  very  little  difference  which  one  was  elected; 
and  others  did  not  go  because  there  was  only  one  candidate. 

Senator  Blair,  llav^e  the  women  begun  to  take  part  in  caucuses  ? 

Mrs.  Johns.  They  have. 

Senator  Blair.  1)o  they  take  part  in  primary  meetings'? 

Mr.  Johns.  They  have  quite  largely,  and  more  so  in  the  second  elec- 
tion than  in  the  first. 

Senator  Blair.  They  are  admitted,  and  no  objection  is  made  to  their 
presence  ? 

Mrs.  Johns."  They  are  sometimes  admitted,  and  sometimes  caucuses 
are  held  so  secretly  that  we  do  not  find  it  out.  But  women  go  to  cau- 
cuses whereever  admitted.  They  had  to  learn,  after  the  first  election, 
that  it  was  necessary  for  them  to  go  into  caucuses.  They  had  an  idea 
in  the  first  election  that  it  would  be  a  proper,  modest,  and  w^omanly 
thing  to  stay  out  of  the  caucuses.  Experience  taught  them  before  the 
second  election  that  it  would  be  necessary,  in  order  to  bring  about  the 
success  whicli  they  desired,  for  them  to  go  into  the  caucuses.  I  think 
they  will  go  into  the  caucuses  this  coming  year  more  largely  than  they 
did  last  year. 

Senator  Blair.  They  will  find  out  that  the  government  of  the  country 
is  in  the  caucuses  and  not  in  Congress. 

Mrs.  Johns.  I  think  most  of  our  women  were  very  much  suri)rised 
to  find  that  the  matter  of  the  nomination  of  officers  was  done  before 
people  got  into  caucus,  very  frequently. 

Senator  Blair.  That  is  a  great  lesson  to  learn  in  politics. 

Mrs.  Johns.  The  fact  that  we  had  such  a  short  time  for  registration 
and  such  a  short  time  for  the  preparation  and  instruction  of  our  colored 
and  foreign  population  in  that  one  regular  election  should  be  taken  into 
consideration  when  we  size  up  the  women's  vote  in  Kansas.  We  had 
no  time  to  i)repare  them. 

As  to  the  charge  that  the  women's  vote  fell  off  in  the  second  election, 
1  assert  that  it  did  not  fall  off*,  exce.pt  in  those  cities  in  which  the  elec- 
tion was  of  lesser  importance,  and  that  it  did  not  fall  off  in  as  large  a 
proportion  as  the  male  vote  did.  The  second  election  was  in  an  off  year 
and  we  had  nothing  but  w  ard  elections.  However,  when  there  was  any 
issue,  when  it  was  a  question  of  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law, 
or  of  schools,  or  any  other  matter  of  interest  to  the  cities,  the  women 
came  out  in  those  wards  in  force,  and  they  voted  in  larger  numbers  than 
they  did  the  first  year. 

For  example,  in  the  city  of  Leave^j^worth  the  temperance  men  had 
failed  for  years  to  oust  an  obnoxious  councilman — a  man  who  had  given 
his  strength  to  the  anti-enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  element. 
In  the  first  election  the  women  even  had  failed  to  rout  him,  but  they 
were  ready  in  the  second  election.  They  called  a  meeting  of  the  women 
who  cared  the  most  for  the  best  interests  of  the  city  and  appointed  some 
committees,  did  pretty  effective  but  very  quiet  work,  so  as  not  to  draw 
the  fire  of  the  enemy,  and  when  election  day  came  the  councilman 
found  himself  counted  out,  greatly  to  the  dismay  and  amazement  of 
his  followers,  and  the  whisky  and  temperance  men  are  agreed  that  the 
women  did  it. 

As  to  the  matter  of  election  to  office,  the  women  in  our  State  have  not 
rushed  into  office  to  the  extent  of  destroying  all  home  joys,  the  abolish- 
ment of  womanhood,  or  of  depleting  the  State  of  young  people.  Our 
honored  senior  Senator  (Mr.  Ingalls)  was  right  when  he  said  we  could 
not  abrogate  the  statutes  of  the  Almighty  by  law.  Indeed,  in  justice 
to  us,  it  ought  to  be  mention ^id  that  we  have  not  tried  to  do  that;  but 


WOMAN  STJFFRAGE. 


59 


our  youDg  men  are  gomg  on  after  tbe  old  fashion,  making  love  to  the 
young  women,  and  those  of  us  who  can  just  remember  how  it  used  to 
be  in  the  old  days  before  women  voted. fail  to  see  any  difference  in  the 
process.  The  performances  are  falling  quite  as  far  short  of  the  prom- 
ises as  they  used  to  be,  but  still  the  woman  is  going  on  implicitly  be- 
lieving the  same  lovely  old  story  and  giving  herself  in  marriage  with 
the  same  comparative  confidence  that  everything  not  quite  sure  will  be 
sure  to  come  to  her. 

Our  statistics  show  that  the  marriage  licenses  in  the, last  two  years 
are  increasing  and  that  divorce  is  decreasing,  which  goes  to  show  that 
marriage  is  not  a  failure  in  Kansas,  even  though  women  do  vote  and  hold 
office. 

We  have  elected  to  the  school  offices  more  than  half  a  hundred  women, 
and  not  to  the  detriment  of  the  home  but  to  its  great  advantage,  be- 
cause these  women  expend  more  time,  more  energy,  more  thought,  on 
the  matters  which  involve  the  physical  and  moral  growth  of  our  chil- 
dren, as  well  as  their  intellectual  growth,  and  so  well  have  they  served, 
and  so  profitably,  that  we  expect  to  double  this  number  in  the  coming 
election. 

The  suffrage  organization  in  Kansas  has  never  made  any  effort  to 
put  women  into  municipal  offices,  but  it  does  make  an  effort  to  put 
women  into  school  offices.  As  to  municipal  offices,  however,  women 
have  very  little  ambition  to  fill  these.  They  are  not  at  all  particular 
about  getting  into  these  offices  themselves,  but  they  are  very  particular 
about  who  does  get  into  them.  Of  about  a  dozen  women,  who  have 
been  elected  to  city  offices  in  four  cities  of  the  State  (and  all  these  have 
been  mayors),  no  complaint  has  been  made.  They  have  served  accept- 
ably. The  city  of  Oscaloosa  last  year  elected  an  entire  woman  govern- 
ment. It  was  done  for  both  the  temporal  and  moral  welfare  of  the 
city,  and  I  am  glad  to  state  that  these  women  have  filled  the  purpose 
of  their  election  in  meeting  and  overcoming  the  difficulties,  which  were 
not  few  nor  small,  and  they  have  proved  the  fact  that  their  government 
does  not  lack  the  element  of  strength. 

1  went  to  Oscaloosa  to  see  these  city  officers,  and  to  find  out  how  they 
came  to  be  elected,  and  how  the  experiment  was  working.  I  found  that 
the  women  themselves,  the  worthy  mayor  and  her  councilwomen,  were 
very  womanly  women,  very  mild,  gentle-mannered,  strong,  capable;  that 
they  knew  exactly  what  they  wanted  to  do,  and  they  knew  how  to  do 
it  and  succeed  in  doing  it.  I  got  my  information  as  to  how  the  exper- 
iment was  working  from  men  to  whom  I  was  an  utter  stranger,  and  who 
were  not  at  all  infiueuced  by  any  leanings  of  mine  in  giving  their  testi- 
mony, and  so  I  think  it  was  unprejudiced.  They  said  that  the  admin- 
istration of  these  women  was  really  satisfactory  to  the  better  element, 
but  that  it  was  extremely  objectionable  to  people  who  wanted  to  violate 
the  Sunday  law,  as  had  been  done  in  that  city  before  these  women  went 
into  office,  to  those  who  wanted  to  plead  that  a  prohibitory  law  does  not 
prohibit,  and  to  old  fogies  who  could  not  see  any  use  in  spending  money 
to  make  streets  and  attending  to  matters  of  sanitation. 

However,  there  is  no  general  movement  in  my  State  at  all  towards 
Oscaloosaing  our  city  governments.  I  do  not  suppose  any  women  will 
be  elected  mayors  this  year  unless  it  is  in  Oscaloosa,  in  order  that  the 
women  may  carry  out  the  work  which  they  have  begun  there. 

Senator  Palmer.  1  understood  you  to  say  that  only  30,000  women 
voted  and  that  60,000  men  voted. 

Mrs.  Johns.  Yes,  sir. 
S.  Rep.  1  -29 


60 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


Senator  Palmer.  That  can  not  be  the  whole  vote  of  KaDsas. 

Mrs.  Johns.  It  was  just  in  the  cities.  I  wish  to  add  that  in  our  third- 
class  cities,  in  wliich  the  elections  are  regular  and  of  equal  importance 
every  year,  in  tlie  second  election  the  woman's  vote  gained  largely  over 
the  first  year.  1  know  many  cities  in  which  the  vote  was  two,  three, 
and  four,  and  in  one  city  forty  times  as  much  as  it  was  the  first  year. 
The  sum  total  of  the  woman's  vote  in  the  third-class  cities  the  second 
y^ar  is  very  much  larger  than  the  sum  total  of  the  woman's  vote  in  those 
same  cities  the  ^rst  year. 


REMARKS  OF  REV.  OLYMPIA  BROWN. 

Miss  Anthony.  The  next  speaker  that  I  present  to  the  committee  is 
Rev.  01ymi)ia  Brown,  of  Wisconsin,  who  will  say  a  much-needed  word, 

Mrs.  Brown.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  come  neither  from 
Massachusetts,  where  women  have  voted  for  the  school  committee,  nor 
yet  from  the  great  West,  where  they  vote  at  the  municipal  elections, 
and  hence  I  can  bring  you  no  testimony  drawn  from  experience  of 
the  effects  of  the  voting  of  women.  I  can  only  give  some  principles 
which  are  familiar  and  support  them  by  undeniable  and  pertinent  facts. 

It  has  been  often  said  that  it  is  always  safe  to  do  right.  It  is  equally 
true  that  it  is  always  unsafe  to  do  wrong. 

It  is  impossible  that  such  a  great  wrong  as  the  disfranchisement  of 
women  should  have  been  done  in  this  country  for  so  many  years  with- 
out working  very  serious  evils  j  and  if  we  can  believe  the  testimony  of 
public  men,  political  campaign  speakers,  and  the  daily  newspapers,  it 
must  be  evident  that  we  have  come  very  far  short  of  perfection  in  the 
matter  of  government  in  the  United  States — indeed,  it  would  seem  that 
we  are  upon  the  very  verge  of  national  ruin. 

Senator  Blair  has  said  that  the  caucus,  and  not  the  Congress,  governs 
the  country,  and  the  question  in  the  caucus  is  always,  How  shall  we 
secure  the  foreign  vote?  What  candidate  will  be  most  pleasing  to  the 
Germans?  Whom  can  we  put  up  that  will  satisfy  the  Scandinavians? 
These  are  the  questions  with  politicians. 

Even  a  great  moral-reform  party  in  my  own  State,  a  party  professedly 
standing  for  principle  and  against  the  "  policy  of  the  old  parties,"  dares 
not  to  avow  its  allegiance  to  woman's  suffrage  lest  it  should  offend  the 
Scandinavians. 

When  great  reformers,  progressive  men,  like  John  M.  Olin  and  Z.  C. 
Richmond,  of  Wisconsin,  are  obliged  to  crucify  conscience  to  please 
Scandinavians,  I  inquire  where  is  the  liberty  of  American  men  ? 
When  every  party  finds  it  necessary  first  of  all  to  please  the  foreigners, 
no  matter  at  what  cost,  it  is  quite  evident  that  the  foreign  vote  governs 
the  country. 

In  the  great  cities  of  the  Northwest  our  city  officials,  our  mayors, 
members  of  the  common  council,  and  even  our  school  boards,  are,  to  a 
lar-ge  extent,  foreigners,  not  the  mostl  earned  or  the  most  nobly  born 
of  the  European  nations,  but  often  men  of  limited  education,  bigoted 
in  religion,  and  ignorant  of  the  first  i)rinciples  of  republicanism. 

Our  forefathers  fought  out  the  war  of  the  Revolution  and  baptized  the 
earth  in  the  blood  of  heroes  only  that  we  might  be  governed  by  the 
tramps,  paupers,  convicts,  the  refuse  of  the  Old  World,  that  have  been 
thrown  upon  our  shores. 

Women  have  through  all  the  years  cf  our  national  life  been  loyal, 
brave,  and  true. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


61 


They  have  by  their  patieuce  aud  fidelity,  their  earuest  endeavor,  and 
their  unflinching  courage,  helped  to  create  this  grand  civilization  of  the 
West ;  they  have  done  their  share  in  redeeming  this  land  from  the  wil- 
derness; they  have  been  an  important  factor  in  founding  homes,  build- 
ing cities,  establishing  manifold  industries,  and  winning  victories,  both 
of  peace  and  war;  and  yet  intelligent,  patriotic,  tax-paying,  native-born 
women  are  made  the  political  subjects  of  foreign  paupers,  and  when 
they  ask  for  the  right  of  suffrage,  which  has  been  declared  to  be  the 
inalienable  right  of  every  citizen,  they  are  told  that  the,  mere  mention 
of  the  subject  must  be  prohibited,  because  it  might  displease  the  Scan- 
dinavians. 

But  it  is  not  women  alone  who  are  the  sufferers.  American  men,  by 
the  disfranchisement  of  women,  are  being  made  themselves  the  subjects 
of  foreign  rule.  We  require  an  American  to  live  here  twenty-one  years 
and  learn  the  nature  of  our  institutions,  the  history  of  the  country,  and 
the  policy  of  the  Government  before  he  votes.  But  foreigners  may  vote 
in  Wisconsin  before  they  have  become  citizens,  learned  anything  of  our 
Government,  or  rendered  any  service  to  the  State.  We  give  them 
twice  as  many  votes  in  proportion  to  their  population  as  we  give  to  our 
own  people.  Their  population  is  largely  male,  it  is  easier  for  men  to 
emigrate  than  it  is  for  women.  They  have  more  temptations  to  do  so. 
They  wish  to  escape  serving  in  the  army  ;  and  often  ftaey  flee  from  the 
officers  of  the  law,  or  from  their  creditors,  and  the  result  is  that  there 
are  at  least  two  millions  more  foreign  men  than  foreign  women  in  the 
country.  While  on  the  other  hand,  owing  to  the  effects  of  the  war  and 
of  accidents,  there  are  a  million  more  American  women  than  there  are 
American  men. 

To  illustrate  the  effect  of  this  let  us  look  at  the  population  of  Wis- 
consin. By  the  census  of  1880  there  were  in  Wisconsin  910,072  native 
born,  and  405,425  foreign  ;  but  although  the  foreign  population  was  not 
quite  half  as  numerous  as  the  native,  yet  they  were  allowed  over  40,000 
more  votes,  the  voting  population  standing,  native,  149,463;  foreign, 
189,409.  Minnesota  presents  a  similar  discrepancy,  as  there  the  popu- 
lation stands,  native,  513,097,  foreign,  207,676.  But  the  vote  wa«,  in 
1880,  native,  88,622  ;  foreign,  123,777.  Thus,  with  only  about  half  the 
l^opulation,  the  foreigners  have  over  35,000  more  votes.  In  New  Jersey 
the  native  population  is  more  than  four  tifnes  as  great  as  the  foreign, 
but  the  vote  stands,  native,  100,656;  foreign,  99,300.  I  might  go  on 
through  all  the  States  showing  how  we  pay  a  premium  upon  foreign 
birth  and  ignorance,  but  I  will  not  weary  you  with  figures.  I  have 
given  you  enough  to  show  that  the  enfranchisement  of  women  is 
only  needed  to  outvote  the  foreign  jiopulation  and  make  secure  Ameri- 
can institutions  and  republican  principles.  And  surely  the  need  of 
woman's  vote  is  most  i^ressing.  When  the  red  flag  is  hoisted  in  our 
great  cities,  when  riots  and  mobs  are  feared  on  every  occasion ;  when 
the  gulf  between  capital  and  labor  is  growing  daily  wider  and  wider ; 
when  our  free  schools  are  being  closed  in  some  parts  of  the  land;  when 
history  is  tampered  with  ;  when  anarchy  threatens  on  the  one  hand,  and 
on  the  other  Catholic  influence  bids  fair  to  take  from  us  all  the  inheri- 
tance of  liberty  that  we  have  received  from  our  fathers,  is  it  not  time  to 
ask  seriously  what  can  be  done? 

This  is  not  merely  a  question  of  the  rights  of  women,  but  of  the  very 
lif<^  of  this  Republic.  Shall  we  have  a  republic?  Shall  we  have  a  free 
government  ?  Shall  the  American  man  have  standing  room  on  Ameri- 
can soil  *?   These  are  the  qu(  stions  which  are  pressing  upon  us. 


G2 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


Ill  a  recent  address  to  the  veterans  in  Indianapolis  the  President- 
elect recognized  the  dangers  whicli  threaten  our  institutions  and  the 
perpetuity  of  onr  Government ;  and  he  attributed  them  to  the  sup- 
inession  of  the  ballot,  saying  very  justly,  "The  suppression  of  the  bal- 
lot under  any  circumstances  is  an  evil  that  can  not  be  tolerated."  We 
need  for  the  salvation  and  permanency  of  this  Government  a  free  bal- 
lot and  a  fair  count  in  all  the  States  of  the  Union."  And  what  he 
most  desired,  he  said,  was  "to  hear  a  bugle  call  for  an  equal  ballot 
sounding  throughout  the  land." 

I  can  not  believe  that  such  a  man  as  Mr.  Harrison  uttered  such  words 
without  knowing  what  he  said,  or  without  meaning  what  he  said.  And 
this  is  not  merely  his  own  utterance.  Il  is  the  utterance  of  the  whole 
]iepublican  party,  as  again  and  again  sounded  through  the  land.  This 
call  for  a  fair  ballot  and  a  fair  count,  and  the  right  of  every  citizen  in 
every  State  to  cast  a  ballot  and  have  it  honestly  counted,  is  conspicuous 
in  the  party  platforms.  It  is  enunciated  everywhere  by  its  speakers, 
who  again  and  again  reiterate  that  the  "Eepublican  party  is  pledged 
to  secure  for  every  citizen  in  every  State  the  right  to  cast  a  ballot  and 
have  it  honestly  counted."  Have  we  not  reason  to  expect  that  the  Re- 
publican party  will,  in  the  coming  four  years,  carry  out  those  pledges 
and  fulfill  its  grand  mission,  thus  saving  the  nation  from  destruction 
and  securing  to  the  manhood  of  America  a  fair  opportunity  to  live  and 
maintain  the  right  of  conscience  and  free  speech  on  American  soil*? 
May  we  not  also  believe  it  will,  at  the  same  time,  do  justice  to  the 
women  of  the  country  by  i)assing  a  sixteenth  amendment  for  their  en- 
franchisement ? 

REMARKS  BY  REV.  ANNIE  SHAW. 

Miss  Anthony.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  now  introduce  to  you 
one  who  is  not  a  lawyer,  one  who  is  not  a  member  of  Congress,  one 
who  is  not  an  M.  D.,  but  one  who  has  the  title  of  Eeverend.  I  think  it 
will  do  this  honorable  committee  a  great  deal  of  good  to  listen  to  the 
Rev.  Annie  Shaw,  of  Illinois.  So  I  shall  introduce  her  as  the  next 
speaker.  I  do  not  know  exactly  what  she  is  going  to  say,  but  I  know 
she  will  speak  in  favor  of  the  sixteenth  amendment  and  woman  suf- 
frage, and  that  is  all  we  are  after. 

Miss  Shaw.  Mr.  Chairman,  and  gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  sup- 
pose Miss  Anthony  has  introduced  me  that  I  may  vouch  for  the  ortho- 
doxy of  the  body  that  has  been  gathered  together  here.  We  are 
orthodox  on  the  woman  suifrage  question,  and  although  they  do  not 
all  agree  with  me  on  matters  of  faith  in  religion,  they  do  agree  with 
me  on  matters  of  faith  in  government. 

We  have  no  apology  to  offer  for  being  here.  We  have  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  if  w^omen  are  to  be  free  they  must  strike  the  blow.  We 
have  long  enough  waited  for  our  chivalric  brothers  to  do  it  for  us.  They 
decline,  preferring  to  bear  our  burden  of  the  ballot,  while  they  also  de- 
cline to  bear  our  burden  of  the  responsibility  of  life.  Since  we  must 
bear  the  responsibility  of  the  ballot  without  having  the  pleasure  of 
bearing  the  ballot  that  we  may  govern  the  responsibility,  we  should 
like  to  govern  the  responsibility  we  have  to  bear.  Yet  while  those  of 
us  who  in  the  different  parts  of  the  country  have  had  no  experience  like 
Mrs.  Johns  of  Kansas,  and  no  experience  like  the  women  of  Massachu- 
setts, and  no  facts  from  experience  to  offer,  we  do  not  come  before  you 
without  a  desire  to  offer  them. 

I  wish  to  plead  to-day  not  for  myself  alone,  but  especially  for  the 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


63 


women  of  the  Territories.  There  is  a  great  deal  of  talk  before  the  coun- 
try now  about  the  injustice  of  the  exclusion  of  the  Territories  from  state- 
hood, and  there  are  great  hopes  on  the  part  of  many  people  that  several 
of  the  Territories  will  soon  be  admitted  as  States.  I  wish  to  plead  in 
behalf  of  the  women  of  those  Territories  that  when  they  are  admitted 
the  word  ^'male"  may  be  left  out  of  the  constitution  and  the  Territories 
admitted  into  the  Union  as  States  only  on  the  ground  that  all  the  people 
in  the  Territories  are  free,  and  that  the  State  shall  come  in  in  the  way 
in  which  we  all  ought  to  have  come  in  in  the  beginning,  without  any 
restriction  on  the  ballot  so  far  as  the  sexes  of  the  citizens  of  the  State 
or  the  Territory  are  concerned. 

I  therefore  wish  to  put  in  a  word  this  morning  for  the  women  of  the 
Territories.  While  you  are  realizing,  as  so  many  of  our  brethren  seem 
to  realize,  the  terrible  burden  of  disfranchisement  on  the  part  of  the 
men  of  those  Territories,  I  trust  that  you  will  also  feel  a  pang  of  suffer- 
ing on  account  of  the  condition  of  disfranchisement  on  the  part  of  the 
women,  and  while  you  are  speaking  for  the  men  that  you  will  speak 
and  work  for  the  women  also. 

We  women  have  wept  a  great  while.  We  have  wept  because  we 
have  been  told  it  is  proper  for  women  to  weep.  We  thought  that 
would  bring  us  justice;  but  justice  does  not  come  to  weeping  women. 
The  only  thing  it  has  brought  us  is  the  thought  that  we  have  no  place 
in  the  Grovernment  because  we  weep.  We  have  tried  to  be  pleasant, 
because  we  have  beeu  told  it  is  becoming  to  women  to  be  pleasant,  and 
then  we  have  been  told  that  we  have  been  altogether  too  pleasant  to 
enter  into  political  relations.  It  is  a  bar  to  our  enfranchisement.  We 
have  tried  to  be  sweet  and  womanly,  and  then  we  have  been  told  that 
we  are  so  sweet  and  womanly  that  it  would  never  do  to  injure  the 
sweetness  and  womanliness  of  our  nature  by  bringing  us  in  contact 
with  coarser  things.  After  having  tried  to  be  what  we  were  told  we 
ought  to  be,  we  have  discovered  that  we  have  only  been  placing  bar- 
riers to  our  further  advancement. 

But  the  mourning  women  have  dried  their  tears ;  the  pretty  women 
have  gone  to  looking  after  something  else;  the  sweet  women  have 
taken  another  course,  and  so  are  come  here  as  neither  sweet,  pretty, 
nor  weeping.  We  come  here  with  strong  convictions.  We  come  with 
the  purpose  of  coming  just  as  often  as  we  are  permitted  to  come  until 
we  obtain  our  request,  like  the  woman  in  the  Word  who  appeared  be- 
fore the  unjust  judge.  It  would  hardly  become  us  to  put  you  on  a  level 
with  the  unjust  judge,  but  we  come  before  you  gentlemen  who  are  our 
judges,  and  we  will  plead  again  and  again  until  our  petition  shall  be 
heard.  We  will  be  here  regularly  and  s^'Stematically,  Providence  per- 
mitting, until  the  angel  Gabriel  blows  the  last  trump,  unless  something 
is  done.  [Laughter  and  applause.]  There  is  only  one  way  to  get  rid 
of  us,  and  that  is  by  granting  our  request.  Then  we  will  stay  at  home. 
There  is  nothing  we  so  much  desire  as  to  remain  at  home. 

Of  women  who  have  never  had  the  experience  of  married  life,  like 
Miss  Anthony  and  myself,  who  are  of  the  superfluous  class  of  women, 
my  State  has  70,000.  I  want  to  know  how  we  are  represented  in  the 
Government  and  by  whom.  Nobody  has  offered  himself  to  represent 
tne  out  of  Government,  and  I  doubt  if  anybody  is  representing  me  in 
Government.  The  question  is,  shall  I  be  unrepresented  while  so  many 
women  are  represented  in  so  many  different  ways  under  different  con- 
ditions ?  I  need  the  ballot  for  my  protection.  In  my  city  of  Boston 
there  are  some  22,000  women  who  are  obliged  to  earn  their  own  liveli- 


64 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


hood.  It  has  been  declared  that  the  ballot  is  worth  50  cents  a  day  to 
the  laboring  man  of  this  coiiDtry.  If  it  is  true  that  the  ballot  is  worth 
50  cents  a  day  to  the  laboring  man  it  is  also  true  that  it  will  be  worth 
50  cents  a  day  to  the  laboring  woman,  and  there  is  not  a  laboring  woman 
of  us  who  would  not  be  glad  for  an  extra  50  cents  a  day.  If  the  ballot 
will  bring  us  this  in  response  to  our  service  rendered  in  the  different 
lines  of  work  in"which  we  are  engaged  we  want  it. 

But  you  may  say  that  the  ballot  has  nothing  to  do  with  pay ;  that 
wages  are  not  regulated  by  the  ballot.  We  know  that  is  true  directly, 
we  know  that  indirectly  legislation  and  public  sentiment  regulate  de- 
mand and  supply,  and  that  regulates  wages.  Just  as  long  as  legisla- 
tion debars  women  from  a  certain  position,  just  as  long  as  social  cus- 
tom, which  rest  upon  legislation,  debars  women  from  certain  lines  of 
employment,  then  women  will  be  more  or  less  crowded  into  few  employ- 
ments and  there  will  be  a  greater  supply  of  laborers  than  of  labor,  and 
the  result  will  be  that  the  wages  of  the  laborer  will  be  reduced.  So  we 
find  women  in  the  city  of  New  York  sewing,  making  shirts  for  4  cents 
a  piece,  making  coarse  overalls  for  3  cents  a  pair,  and  then  we  wonder 
that  there  are  immoral  women  all  over  our  country !  The  simple  fact 
is  the  wages  that  are  paid  the  laboring  women  of  this  country  are  so 
meager  that  it  is  strange  to  me  that  the  cry  during  the  last  campaign 
was  not  "  Look  at  the  working  women  of  New  York,  look  at  the 
working  women  of  Chicago  and  of  Boston,"  instead  of  *^Look  at  the 
working  women  of  London  and  of  the  other  cities  of  England."  We 
have  them  where  they  can  barely  sustain  themselves  by  the  hard  labor 
which  they  render  seventeen  hours  a  day.  I  consider  that  the  great- 
est class  of  laborers  we  have  in  this  nation  are  the  working  women, 
who  are  trying  to  sustain  life  on  the  meager  pittance  which  they  receive 
for  their  labor.  The  ballot  means  better  pay  for  women  as  well  as  it 
means  better  pay  for  men.  We  have  these  women  not  only  in  a  few 
cities,  but  generally  all  over  the  country  women  are  required  to  labor 
by  the  absolute  necessity  of  earning  a  livelihood,  and  they  desire  to 
earn  it  in  better  ways.  I  am  the  national  superintendent  of  the  fran- 
chise department  of  the  Womans'  Christian  Temperance  Union.  There 
are  more  than  200,000  of  us,  and  wherever  we  have  gone  in  the  different 
lines  of  our  work  we  have  been  brought  at  last  to  a  great  barrier,  and 
we  can  go  no  farther  unless  we  have  the  ballot  to  open  up  the  way.  In 
our  protective  agency  in  Chicago  we  fintl  that  while  it  is  quite  possible 
to  secure  a  favorable  result  in  a  civil  suit,  it  is  rarely  possible  to  secure 
a  favorable  result  in  a  criminal  suit,  and  in  our  work  in  the  northern 
woods  of  Michigan  and  Wisconsin,  where  terrible  conditions  of  im- 
purity prevail,  we  find  ourselves  blocked  at  every  step  simply  because 
we  are  politically  powerless.  Wherever  we  go,  and  under  all  conditions, 
we  feel  that  we  need  the  ballot  to  help  us,  in  order  that  the  results  we 
desire  for  moral  conditions  may  be  advanced. 

One  great  fear  of  us  women  is  that  we  will  all  vote  the  prohibition 
ticket.  A  gentleman  told  me  his  only  objection  to  the  enfranchisement 
of  women  was  that  the  women  might  all  vote  the  prohibition  ticket,  and 
yet  this  same  gentleman  was  very  angry  with  a  certain  district  of  our 
country  because  there  were  persons  deprived  of  the  right  of  suffrage 
there  on  the  very  ground  that  they  did  not  vote  the  ticket  that  some^ 
body  else  wanted  them  to  vote.  The  simple  fact  is  women  no  more 
agree  among  themselves  upon  a  ticket  than  do  men.  There  would  be  as 
great  diversity  of  opinion  among  us  as  there  is  among  the  men  of  the 
country  as  to  the  ticket  we  would  vote.    We  would  probably  vote  our 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


65 


own  convictions  in  whicbever  direction  that  might  lie,  and  we  are  not 
asking  for  the  ballot  that  we  may  vote  one  way  or  another,  but  that  we 
may  protect  ourselves  under  the  conditions  in  which  we  are  placed  in 
whatever  way  we  need,  and  because  we  find  that  wherever  we  under- 
take any  legislative  work  the  ballot  is  necessary. 

Take,  for  instance,  the  case  of  petitioning  a  legislature.  Every  gen- 
tleman here  knows  the  value  of  a  petition  upon  which  the  names  of  prom- 
inent and  influential  political  men  are  found,  and  the  utter  want  of  value 
of  a  petition  that  is  signed  by  a  large  number  of  women.  If  I  were  to 
go  before  any  legislative  body  in  this  country  with  a  petition  I  would 
rather  have  the  names  of  one  hundred  influential  men  than  the  names  of 
one  hundred  thousand  women ;  the  petition  would  be  of  more  influence. 
I  well  remember  when  I  was  about  to  sign  a  petition  on  a  certain  subject 
in  Massachusetts,  the  lady  who  gave  me  the  petition  snatched  both  peti- 
tion and  pencil  out  of  my  hand  and  ran  to  a  man,  and  when  she  came  back 
apologized,  on  the  ground  that  the  name  of  one  man  was  worth  the 
names  of  forty  women.  Why  is  it?  Is  it  because  the  legislators  feel 
more  kindly  towards  men  than  towards  women  and  do  more  justly  to 
men  than  to  women'?  Not  at  all.  It  is  merely  because  men,  having 
political  power,  are  their  constituents,  and  they  conserve  the  interests 
of  their  constituents,  while  they  can  not  conserve  the  interests  of  a  dis- 
franchised class. 

We  are  at  a  disadvantage,  not  because  we  are  women — nobody  be- 
lieves that — but  because  in  a  republic  a  disfranchised  class  is  always 
at  a  disadvantage,  and  because  we  are  called  the  weaker  sex.  Are  we 
to  be  deprived  of  every  right  because  we  are  weak,  and  then  told  to  go 
alone,  when  men  can  not  get  along,  with  their  superior  strength,  with- 
out the  help  of  government?  We  ask  that  we  may  have  the  ballot  for 
own  protection ;  for  the  protection  of  the  home ;  that  we  aid  good  men 
to  give  us  the  best  forms  of  government.  As  one  of  your  Senators  has 
said,  the  nature  of  the  sexes  is  widely  different.  We  believe  on  that 
very  ground  that  we  should  be  enfranchised,  in  order  that  the  diverse 
nature  of  our  race,  the  masculine  and  the  feminine,  may  affect  legisla- 
tion as  long  as  legislation  affects  us.  Everybody  knows  that  the  opin- 
ion of  a  wise  man  and  a  wise  woman  upon  any  subject  is  infinitely 
better  than  the  opinion  of  two  men  or  of  two  women  on  the  same  sub- 
ject. What  I  want  is  the  outcome  of  both  for  the  interests  of  all,  and 
this  can  only  be  done  when  in  counting  the  opinion  of  the  people  of 
our  country  we  count  the  opinion  of  both  men  and  women.  You  will 
find  in  the  end  that  women  are  as  capable  and  willing  to  give  a  wise 
opinion  as  men. 

Hence,  for  the  general  good  of  our  nation,  we  beseech  you  that  there 
shall  be  something  done  that  shall  give  to  us  a  sixteenth  amendment, 
that  there*  may  no  longer  be  any  disfranchisement  in  this  country 
either  because  of  race,  color,  previous  condition  of  servitude,  or  sex. 
[Applause.] 

REMARKS  BY  MISS  SUSAN  B.  ANTHONY. 

MisS  Anthony.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  the  fact  that  we  bring 
before  you  this  morning  only  seven  speakers  is  not  because  we  have  not 
a  score  more  here  from  almost  as  many  different  States  whom  I  should 
be  glad  to  have  address  you,  but  because  of  the  shortness  of  your  time. 

Allow  me  simply  to  mention  the  States  which  are  represented  here 
t)efore  you  dismiss  us.  Minnesota  is  represented  by  Ella  M.  S.  Marble, 
S.  Rep.  2543  5  ' 


66 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


president  of  her  State  woman  suffrage  society ;  Kentucky,  by  Mary 
B.  Clay,  the  daufi:bter  of  Cassius  M.  Clay ;  New  York,  by  Lillie  Deve- 
reux  Blake,  Mary  Seymour  Howell,  Sarah  Anthony  Burtis,  who  was 
secretary  of  the  first  woman's  rights  convention  in  1848,  and  Charlotte 
Daley^;  Pennsylvania,  by  Matilda  Hindmao,  Dr.  Caroline  Dodson,  and 
Kachel  Foster- Avery ;  Ohio,  by  Sarah  M.  Perkins  and  Sara  Wiuthrop 
Smith,  who  rolled  up  13,000  names  of  men  and  women  at  the  Cincinnati 
and  Columbus  Centennial  Expositions  who  desired  the  enfranchise- 
ment of  women  ;  Indiana,  by  Ida  W.  Harper  and  May  Wright  Sewall; 
Nebraska,  by  Clara  B.  Colby,  the  editor  of  the  Woman's  Tribune,  that 
comes  weekly  to  each  of  you  and  all  the  members  of  Congress ;  Mary- 
laud,  by  Mrs.  Caroline  Hallowell  and  Mrs.  Sarah  T.  Miller;  Massa- 
chusetts, by  Lavina  A.  Hatch  and  Harriet  B.  Shattuck,  the  president 
of  the  national  branch  of  our  association;  and  here  is  Utah,  the  Terri- 
tory in  which  Congress  took  from  all  the  women  their  vested  right  of 
suffrage,  represented  by  Margaret  Caine  and  Emily  S.  Richards. 

But  I  do  not  propose,  gentlemen,  to  ask  you  to  listen  to  all  of  these 
women,  though  each  one  could  make  a  most  excellent  argument.  I 
know  the  majority  of  this  committee  is  in  favor  of  woman's  enfranchise- 
ment aud  will  do  all  in  its  power  to  secure  the  legislation  that  we  seek; 
still  I  must  repeat  that  this  is  the  twelfth  Congress  to  which  the  women 
of  this  nation  have  appealed  for  the  protection  of  their  "  citizen's  right 
to  vote." 

As  has  been  stated  by  one  of  the  speakers,  we  have  not  only  been 
coming  here  for  the  last  score  and  more  of  years,  but  we  shall  be  com- 
ing every  winter  for  the  next  twenty  and  more  years,  unless  Congress 
shall  pass  the  resolution  for  a  sixteenth  amendment,  or,  better  still,  a 
declaratory  act,  which  Congress  has  ample  power  to  do,  proclaiming 
that  women  already  possess  the  right  to  vote  under  the  original  Con- 
stitution, with  its  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  amendments. 

This  committee  has  reported  favorably  from  Congress  to  Congress 
ever  since  its  first  appointment,  and  I  hope  you  will  not  fail  to  bring  in 
a  report,  late  as  it  is  in  this  last  session  of  the  Fiftieth  Congress,  and 
also  take  the  steps  to  secure  both  a  discussion  aud  a  vote  upon  the 
floor  of  the  Senate  before  the  4th  of  March  arrives. 


REMARKS  BY  MRS.  HARRIETTE  R.  SHATTUCK. 

Mrs.  Shattuck.  I  wish  to  make  a  request  of  the  committee  before  it 
adjourns.  The  speakers  so  far  have  represented  the  petitions  for  an 
amendment  to  the  National  Constitution.  I  could  well  have  been  in- 
cluded, although  it  was  not  necessary,  because  I  sent  personally  a  peti- 
tion here  representing  our  Massachusetts  National  Branch,  which  is 
before  your  committee.    It  was  sent  early  in  the  session. 

1  should  like  also  to  speak  of  another  petition  which  has  been  referred 
to  you  lately — that  of  Mrs.  Harriet  H.  Kobiuson,  of  Massachusetts,  ask- 
ing for  the  removal  of  her  political  disabilities.  That  petition  was  sent 
to  Senator  Dawes,  who  presented  it  in  the  Senate  and  referred  it  to  your 
committee,  as,  of  course,  you  know.  Mrs.  Eobinson,  whose  daughter 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  has  been  in  communication  with  the  commitree 
through  its  chairman,  and  will,  at  the  proper  time,  present  her  argu- 
ment on  the  invitation  of  the  committee. 

I  am  not  here  to  present  any  argument,  but  simplj^  to  ask  you  to 
consider  the  petition  and  to  consider  seriously  the  argument  when  it 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE. 


67 


is  made.  Believing  that  a  personal  application  is  better  sometimes 
than  a  written  one,  I  thought  I  had  better  represent  my  mother  in  ask- 
ing you,  when  the  matter  comes  up  (she  has  legal  counsel  engaged  to 
present  it  in  proper  form),  that  you  will  consider  it  as  it  should  be  con- 
sidered, and  remember  that  when  I  was  here  as  her  daughter  I  asked 
you  so  to  do. 

Senator  Palmer.  Is  there  anything  further  that  you  wish  to  present, 
Miss  Anthony? 
Miss  Anthony.  1  believe  not. 
The  committee  accordingly  adjourned. 


i 


V'' 


